At first glance, putting urban townhouses along the riverfront between the Riverplex and Spring Street seems like a crazy idea. But is it so crazy that it just might work?
I stopped by the Economic Development department and took a look at their proposal for this stretch of land. It would only displace about 100 feet of park land, which they plan to replace — yes replace — by using sediment dredged from the river to extend the shoreline. Thus, no park land would actually be lost. It would cause minimal disruption to the park, requiring only that the sand volleyball courts and Constitution Garden be relocated a short distance away and that a small portion of the bike path be rerouted. The city owns the land, one of the few parks not owned by the Peoria Park District.
The townhouses and home listings would face outward toward the park and the river, and a new road would be built (it could just be an extension of Water Street, or it could be given a new name like Riverfront Drive) between the Riverplex parking lot and Spring Street. The city itself wouldn’t build the townhouses or the road, but would put out bids to developers instead. The idea is to get private dollars reinvested downtown.
The development would not be merely residential. It would be mixed use. So the ground level of the complexes would include a retail component which could include things like a deli, restaurant, grocery store, etc.
There would be an added bonus to this development, too. It could help the city with its combined sewer overflow problem. The combined sewer intercept runs underneath the park. If the city were to put in a larger intercept pipe or additional pipe storage, it would have to dig up some of that land at the city’s sole expense. But if a private developer were building a new neighborhood there, the excavation costs could be shared to the city’s and developer’s mutual benefit.
Reaction to the idea on the Journal Star and Peoria Pundit sites has been negative because of two things: Taft Homes and PMP Fermentation. So that was one of my first questions when I visited the Economic Development Department.
The city has been in contact with the Peoria Housing Authority, and the PHA is planning to replace Taft Homes with River-West-style housing in the future. They may be able to move up implementation of that project to roughly coincide with the building of townhouses along the riverfront. As far as crime is concerned, the argument is that having up to 200 new residential homes will make the area safer because it will provide more “eyes on the street” in that part of town. It will combat the culture of “I didn’t see nothin'” that is prevalent among lower-income residents.
PMP Fermentation is owned by Fuso Chemical Co. of Osaka, Japan, and within the past year they’ve shut down half of their physical plant. They closed two buildings and laid off 16 workers in September 2006 because “the company can buy its chemical products cheaper from China rather than produce them in Peoria,” according to Journal Star archives. This has mitigated the impact PMP has on the livability of the area.
Furthermore, there’s a bit of inconsistency in arguing against townhouses here, but in favor of park land. If crime and industry are so terrible down there, one would think no one would want to play volleyball, ride bikes, walk around Constitution Garden, etc., in that area of town. Yet people do. Wouldn’t townhouses further improve the area? And couldn’t it be the start of more renewed investment on the near north side?
I think the idea has some merit and should be given fair consideration. I’m looking forward to Director Craig Hullinger’s presentation to the City Council this evening. I’m sure he’ll get plenty of tough questions about the location and its challenges.
Well put, C.J. Your research and thoughts have refuted all those neysayers. I think it would be a great use of the land and help revitalize a beautiful area that had been given up to crime. The park along there has done wonders as you say, people are using it. People use the Riverplex. People use the Riverfront Park. Why should the good people abandon this area to the ‘homes’ and the slumlords? Build it and they will come!
Hmmm, there’s also an active railroad behind the proposed townhouses. You trail proponents, if you’re consistent, need to oppose this development.
He has refuted nothing. C.J. doesn’t deal sufficiently with the loss of parkland. If the city of Peoria is going to be in the businesses of being stewards of open parkland, they need to NOT allow parkland to be lost because some developer has a scheme.
Two things, CJ:
“If crime and industry are so terrible down there, one would think no one would want to play volleyball, ride bikes, walk around Constitution Garden, etc., in that area of town. Yet people do.” But no one does those things at night. When does most crime happen..during the day or night? I’ve ridden my bike down there many times and with all the people using that trail I see little opportunity for “unseen” crime there right now.
If they do the (fairly unaffordable to most, look at the current) River-West concept, to where will these people who can’t afford it be displaced? Or will it just be a River West design?
I’m not against it, not for it. As long as the parks and trails remain, and remain public, its cool. However, I think putting up “401 Water” priced units would be a mistake. If the average guy (or gal) or couple who would like to live “downtown” and appreciate the amenities it offers, pricing has to be affordable to the masses, just not those who can afford a 250,000K living space a year.
Did you read my post, Billy? Did you read that they’re going to extend the shoreline to replace the parkland they would be using for this development? That’s not sufficient for you?
Chef:
(1) You said it yourself — with all the people down there, there’s little opportunity for “unseen” crime. What if there were 200 households down there at night? You don’t think that would have a dampening effect on crime?
(2) It’s my understanding that it will just be a River West design.
(3) I agree that the housing would need to be affordable.
Also, I’m not necessarily endorsing the proposal. I’m just saying it deserves to be seriously considered and not dismissed out of hand. There are lots of hard questions that need to be asked, not the least of which (which probably won’t be asked, regrettably) is how this plan jibes with the Heart of Peoria Plan.
I’ll get a better look at it tonight. I remain concerned that the extension of the parkland will become less of a priority once this is approved. It’s not like we haven’t seen that before.
I say tear down Taft and build the townhomes there. There are multitudes of opportunities for redevelopment in the Near North Side without scrubbing up some park land. We need to exhume the cancer not give it more red meat.
Building out into the river is a bad idea too. Narrowing river channels is bad bad bad when floods come. They will need Army Corps of Engineers approval which I think would be unlikely.
This develpoment is a mirror of the condo townhouses that Central Illinios Properties is building in East Peoria next to the I-74 bridge.
Also, I have heard that the Constitution Garden site has been predetermined by the school board (just rumor), I wonder how this development plays into this scheme?
200 homes lend to “opportunity” for criminals that currently doesn’t exist in an area of town we know has crime issues. I’m guessing if it is well lit and has an open feel with few places for the bad element to be inconspicuous, it is all good.
I’ll chip in for ornamental lighting and an arbor.
Bring the displaced up to the East Bluff where they can continue to ruin life for those trying to have a decent place to live. Get your heads out of the sand, who is going to buy a $150,000 townhouse in that area? Put it where Museum Square is supposed to go.
On Outside the Horseshoe, they tossed out a $250,000 figure for the units. Hmmm get my mini McMansion in a good school district with a 25min commute or live in a townhome next to the projects in District 150? I’m not saying there isn’t a market for downtown living. I just don’t think there is a large market for quarter of a million dollar townhomes downtown. That small market is alreay being served by 401 Water and the Twin Towers.
What he actually said was that the developer would decide the price of the homes. His conjecture was $225,000 to $250,000. He also said that if no developer is interested (i.e., if there is no market for it), then it won’t happen.
I should have been more clear. I know he said the market will decide; I just don’t want the city meddling in the market to get this project to happen. If you have $200,000 plus and want to live downtown there are already options available to you. I thought this was going to be something diffenent. I don’t really buy the idea that it being new construction makes it radically different.
Look at how well Spring Hollow has done.
Dave Jordan: Next they’ll want that line torn out….