Only three council members voted in favor of the zoning commission’s recommendation to require a supermajority of the council to expand the boundaries of an institutional district. The general consensus was that the system isn’t broken, so they didn’t want to “fix” it.
One of the council members trotted out the popular notion that there’s no harm being done by Bradley because they’re buying out their neighbors at above-market prices — in some cases, five times the property value. It sounds like they’re a really good neighbor, doesn’t it? Wouldn’t you just love to get a cool half-million for your $100,000 house?
The problem with this reasoning is that it doesn’t take into account the whole neighborhood. Take the example of Bradley University buying the houses along Maplewood across from the Fieldhouse. Yes, the people on Maplewood are getting a great deal, but what about the rest of the Arbor District? What about the properties on Cooper or Rebecca?
The answer is that the neighborhood as a whole is destabilized.
Why? Because who wants to buy in a neighborhood when the university is expanding west and that beautiful historical house on Cooper may be the next to be acquired within a few years? It’s not the family who wants to put down roots in the neighborhood and raise their kids there. It’s someone looking to buy a property for $100,000 and hopefully get $500,000 for it when the university decides it wants it.
And for those neighbors who are already there, how many of them want to put new landscaping around their house? Or put in new windows? Or new siding? Or even a new paint job? If the residents reasonably expect the university to keep moving west, it would be silly to put a lot of capital improvements into their houses.
Speculative purchases. Deferred maintenance. This is what happens when institutions disregard the boundaries of their institutional district.
But the council, judging by the rhetoric of the “nay” voters, thinks everything is hunky-dory with Bradley’s property acquisitions. They’re not interested in taking any action against Bradley’s encroachment into the Arbor District, let alone enacting the modest proposal that came before the council tonight. As far as they’re concerned, Bradley’s doing the neighborhood a favor by disobeying the city’s own ordinance.
I hate to say it, but I would surely sell my house for 5x what it’s worth.
The arbor district will be wiped out in time. I mentioned that once to Reid of Reid’s Mobile after him asking me about the goings on in the neighborhood. His response: “isn’t that what they’ve always done?”
Well, yes, it is.
Bradley has ripped out the neighborhood to the east which puts the houses on Moss backing up to college apartments. Now to the west Maplewood will be gone. Where will the rental houses and students go? One street over, of course- to Cooper. A quiet and mostly family owned street.
My backyard has an alley. Behind the alley are more houses. If my kid’s playset overlooked a parking deck, I may be more likely to want to get out of here. Who would I sell to? Possibly a landlord looking to turn it into rentals for Bradley kids?
And thus former grand homes, and the neighborhood, goes to sh*t and down in value; Bradley can buy up the “slumlord student houses”, and the cycle continues.
Nice to know that a supermajority isn’t watching the backs of the neighborhoods.
So, how does Bradley grow then? If they can’t expand, what do they do?
Why should they not have the right to purchase back land that originally belonged to the trust set up by Ms. Bradley, especially at prices well above the market value?
If the the neighborhoods are unstable enough that losing a street every 30-60 years causes them to “crumble”, perhaps they weren’t stable to begin with.
How long has the Field House been there? Since the end of WWII. So, Bradley has not expanded into that part of the West Bluff in 60 years… Hardley “explosive” expansion as I have read it called.
Yes, they did tear down a couple blocks of houses for the St James Apartments on the other side of University, but those blocks were among some of the most run down in Peoria. Did this really destabilize the neighborhood? It might have destabilized the crack industry in that part of town. Oh wait, the Crack District is across Main Street from the apartments.
The Bradley “controversy” is nothing more than sensationalism, and the logic behind the Big Evil Bradley theory runs short of complete.
Nobody said Bradley was evil. All I’m saying is that they should abide by section 2.16 of Peoria’s zoning code.
Tony… sure the Field house needs replaced. Sure.. there is a dorm that needs replaced (don’t recall its name). I might even buy into needing to update the rec center they have. But how exactly does that involve the houses on Maplewood? It doesn’t. You build a new field house or whatever it will be, exactly where the old on stood. Same with the rest. Wait… that is Bradley’s plan. So what is it again they need Maplewood for? Oh yeah… Parking. Great land use !!! Totally non-new urbanist. Reduntant and unnecessary.
CJ: You didn’t SAY it but the feeling on this forum and PeoriaPundit is definite that Bradley is evil. Yes, they should follow the rules.
Mahkno: Whether the parking is necessary or not is not for you or me to decide. If Bradley wants it, and they purchase the property, and the City ok’s it, then let them go ahead. If there is a problem then take it out on the City, not Bradley. If Bradley says they need parking, how do they do it while being “new urbanist”? Since there virtually no parking around the Fieldhouse, people resort to parking on the street. Wouldn’t a parking deck to keep people off the street be better for the neighborhood? Keep them from trashing up people’s front yards, make the streets more accessible during an event, etc…
I am usually with you in re: the new urbanist thinking, but here I have to back up Tony. And it isn’t just because i work at Bradley.
1. Bradley has not expanded in years. The pace of their expansion is that of a snail.
2. The school district for Arbor, Uplands, Moss-Bradley SUCKS in a huge way. I would love to have bought an old house, and could have afforded a nice-ish one no problem. But I wasn’t up for sending my kids there. Whittier is passable, but beyond that? Hence, why would most families want to settle there? Plus, hello, old homes and lead poisoning. Peoria is in the top cities in the nation with this problem.
3. Bradley is a great feeder for our economy, no matter how you slice it. A strong percentage of grads stay in the area and make good money and contribute to the community and all that.
4. Loads of Bradley employees live in the neighborhood, and unless they leave, they aren’t going anywhere.
I’m inclined to agree with Tony’s alarmist appelation. The Arbor district needs help, yeah, but Bradley isn’t that big a threat.
(1) Again, I never said Bradley shouldn’t be allowed to expand (although I do question the necessity of it). I merely suggested they should follow the zoning regulations to do so, so that the neighborhoods won’t be destabilized. I also don’t think that a supermajority to expand the boundaries is an onerous restriction.
(2) My family, which includes three small children, lives in one of those old, lead-poisoned homes with the crappy school district where responsible families wouldn’t dream of living. So do other frequent commenters on my blog. So, please keep in mind that when you denigrate these homes and neighborhoods, I take it personally.
(3) Bradley is a wonderful institution. My grandmother and my wife both graduated from there, and I attended there for a while myself. Just because I disagree with Bradley’s encroachment into the Arbor District doesn’t mean that I think they’re the devil.
(4) Well, they’re certainly not “that big a threat” to someone who lives in Mossville and might benefit from increased parking at work. You should come to an Arbor District or Uplands neighborhood association meeting sometime.
I think the homes are gorgeous and are often jealous of folks who live in them, honestly. I have friends in the Uplands. I apologize for dissing your homes – that’s not what I meant. But I know people moving out of these neighborhoods, for various reasons, none of which are Bradley’s expansion.
Do your kids go to Whittier? Will they go to Manual or whichever HS is yours? Are you confident in those schools? I really want to know.
And I don’t have any trouble parking at work. Most of us 8-5 people don’t. Professors with odd schedules usually do.
But if 4500 people show up for an event at the new arena some lovely Saturday afternoon – do y’all want them clogging up your neighborhoods looking for parking. That’s a PITA no matter which way you slice it. In addition to the limited parking at Bradley for students on a daily basis. A little parking garage could make everyone’s life a little better. No?
CJ, you should be proud to take offense to the comments because it means you actually care. If only it were the same in other neighborhoods in Peoria.
The homes in SOME of that area are quite beautiful. I don’t know if I would call Maplewood a good example of that though. A few streets down or even better, across Western, is where the beautiful homes really are. Are they talking about the Uplands area or the crumbling Arbors? There is a difference, isn’t there?
Folks let’s be realistic. Whether you think the expansion is necessary or not, it would be the first expansion move in that direction in 60+ years. As for the supermajority thing, the council should be consistent, and requiring a supermajority to change an institutional plan would be inconsistant.
I take exception to the Manual dig. I sent 2 boys through Manual and both graduated with honors, one the Salutatorian and the other 3rd in his class. Both Sterling Merit Award winners by the way. One now teaches History and the other is in Computer Sciences.
I have a good friend on Cooper Street who lives right behind one of those homes that sold for $500,000. He has a beautiful home and has raise a big family in it.
Now while Bradley does indeed infuse money into Peoria, some of the crap the neighborhoods have endured from the student body, the illegal parking, and crime has been numerous. Try and park on Cooper or any Upland street without a permit and you get a ticket. Bradley is land locked plain and simple. Tough.
My idea is that Bradley builds a nice new field house on one of those cornfields out by the Grand Prairie. Plenty of free parking without a deck and they can preserve that small town private up your ass college they like so much and spare the neighborhoods. I think the people living in the Uplands can handle their lead paint and the schools without some out of towner telling them otherwise.
Emtronics, from your reasoning you should support the parking deck. It would get cars off the road. Bradley wants everything on their campus not out north.
How exactly do you define Bradley as being an “out of towner”?
CGiselle12: Only one of my children is of school age and she goes to a private school. But that’s not a reflection on Whittier, which is an excellent school by all accounts. Plenty of families in my neighborhood send their kids there. I don’t know at this point where my children will go to high school, because of course things can change dramatically in 11-16 years. If they were high school age today, they would go to Central.
Sorry Tony you mis-read my post or I didn’t come across correctly. The neighborhoods have the parking resolved as far as their streets go, ie, no parking sticker, you get a ticket.
The out of towners is in reference to the people who do not live in Peoria, or pay Peoria property taxes, butalways seem to come forward with how they would do things or how Peoria should do things. These same people seem to have plenty of critizism for our schools and where and how we should fund and build them yet they in no way support them. I guess it’s OK to say, live in Dunlap and point a finger at Peoria, but I don’t like it.