It was a long meeting tonight (a little over two hours), but in the end the Uplands Residential Association reaffirmed last month’s vote to oppose N1 zoning for the Pi Phi house at the corner of Institute and Main.
Our second district councilperson Barbara Van Auken couldn’t be here tonight since she’s out of town, so at-large councilman Gary Sandberg stood in for her, explaining what could happen to the property if it were rezoned or not rezoned. He had clearly done a lot of research on the issue and his comments were very helpful. Also visiting the neighborhood association meeting was at-large councilman George Jacob, who even brought his wife along.
The meeting was very civil and organized. No yelling or fighting. There were good arguments made on both sides. But when it came right down to it, the majority of homeowners just don’t trust Bradley. They haven’t earned our trust. And that’s largely why the N1 zoning request was defeated.
Bradley has stated that they will abide by the wishes of the neighborhood association, so I expect they will not ask for this property to be rezoned at April’s Zoning Commission hearing or any subsequent hearings (in the near future at least).
UPDATE (3/9): As if to provide final vindication that the Uplands made the right decision last night, the Journal Star published an editorial this morning in favor of institutional zoning for the Pi Phi house. Since they’re for it, we clearly made the right decision by voting against it.
They titled their editorial “Bradley is not the bogeyman.” This from the same company that has launched a massive “Save the Journal Star” campaign. Perhaps I should write an editorial of my own called, “Copley Press is not the bogeyman,” and tell the workers there “to relax.” 🙂
They argue that Bradley has been a good neighbor and quote Gary Anna’s assurance that Bradley is “not looking to encroach into the Uplands.” And if you believe Gary Anna, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in purchasing. Seriously, I’m sure they’re not looking to encroach right now, but 10-15 years from now, after Gary Anna is gone and a new administration is in place, things will change. We don’t need the precedent.
What’s N1?
N1 = Not 1 bit of warning, Not 1 bit of input, Not 1 concern for anything the residents have to say, Not 1 chance in hell of stopping an institution from doing whatever it wants, Not 1 chance in hell of changing any plans the institution might have. It is brutal institutional zoning and basically gives the land over to a large institution to do with as they please whenever they please, be very careful whith what land is turned to N1 and make damn sure you do not care at all what happens on that land. N1 is a big greasy blob of lubricant just waiting to be applied liberally …………… well you get my drift.
Vonster: “N1” is institutional zoning. You can read more about it here.
Did you catch the Urinal Star’s suggestion and endorsement that Bradley and the Uplands should greenway Main St?
The spin and factual errors of the Op-Ed are astounding… and people will read that bile and actually believe it.
Mahkno: Yes, I saw that they wrote:
You know what would beautify that area more? If they narrowed Main Street. Then there would be room for wider sidewalks, street trees, and it would naturally slow down traffic which currently whizzes by at 40-45 mph despite the 30 mph speed limit.
Wider sidewalks. That would be nice. As it stands my kids and I walk the alleys because the sidewalk along Main Street is useless. One false move and they’re goners. Heck, I don’t even like to walk on that sidewalk by myself, come to think of it.
The public realm plays a gigantic part in determining what the private realm is.
A greenway isn’t necessary down Main St, but a massive change in roadway character is.
In order for traffic on Main St to lighten up/go slower you have to provide an alternative route. Basic traffic planning 101. And the way this area is configured, what with the bluffs/hills and 74 cutting through – where are they going to create an alternative that doesn’t run through your neighborhoods? Seriously, not dissing the comments. Just asking?
Valid point cgiselle. I have pointed this out many times. The west bluff has 4 major roadways converging onto University; Main, McArthur, Farmington Rd. and Western. The entire south side of Peoria is channelled onto University. This a is problem that requires a variety of things to occur to alleviate. Not sure I will get to them all….
Now when Main was under some reconstruction due to the sidewalks being replaced, the roadway was down to 1 lane both ways. This lasted for about 6 months. Overlapping that was some roadwork on University and the reconstruction of the University overpass which forced traffic to 1 lane both ways. Guess what? The world didn’t stop and miraculously a lot of people took alternate routes. It was actually kind of nice because traffic did go down during that. When the work was done… all the cars came back. This pretty much goes to prove that if you widen a road, traffic will increase to fill it. Likewise if you narrow… it will decrease.
Solutions…
a) Put Sterling Ave through. West Peoria would have a hissy fit over that but really why should the rest of the West Bluff be burdened by W. Peoria’s traffic? Politically this would be unlikely to happen.
b) Look to putting a road down along, parallel to Kickapoo Creek. There is a narrow road on the west side of the creek but that doesn’t lend itself well to widening. This road would connect to Route 8 which passes through Pottstown… and then connect to some north-south road farther up (Koerner?).
c) Get serious about economic development and the problem of expanding northward. Part of the problem is that the south end has to commute to jobs on the north end. We need to find a way to get jobs back into the south side. Most of the traffic coming through McArthur and Western are commuters. That means getting retail back into the downtown area. That means taking the Heart of Peoria plan to heart to stabilize the south side. That means getting serious about crime. There are huge swaths of unused or underutilized commercial or industrial property on the south side. Stop approving the conversion of fertile productive farmland and insist upon the conversion of nearly abandoned brown earth real estate. If emminent domain needs to be used, use it.
d) When new development is generated insist that it be socially diverse. Stop creating and maintaining a ghetto of the south side. Break up the PHA housing. Spread low income housing thoughout peoria. Create a market for low income housing so that low income people can live closer to their employment. Likewise explore some redevelopment in the impoverished area to bring wealth back into the area. I know there are people who tire of the long commutes.
Mahnko,
I especially agree with #3 and #4. As #5, isn’t the city looking to widen MLK to provide an outlet for downtown traffic? That doesn’t help those wanting to go north, but might help some.
cgiselle — traffic, much like water, will always find a way. If you narrow Main Street, traffic will likely find an alternate route. The problem is that some cars will choose to cut through a neighborhood, and many neighbors will find that impossible to live with.
Mahkno, you say to “spread low income housing throughout Peoria”. I think the city has done that and it has lead to a huge drop in home values with rising crime and increased rental stock in the older neighborhoods. It has also caused the mass movement to the north. If you like living next to a crack house you have plenty of choices in this city. For those of us who chose not to live next to a crack house we buy our way to the north.
For all those who will cry boo hoo not all low income housing is crack housing you are right, but enough of it is to give it that much earned reputation.
I thought there were plans a while back for a bunch of low income housing out in the Dunlap area? Seems like a great place to put some public housing, good schools, shopping and an area in need of some diversity.
Raoul, No-one moves to Dunlap for diversity, they move for the exact opposite reason.
Gary Sandberg had this to say in the comments section of today’s Journal Star editorial:
Both raol duke and peoriaillinoisan are missing a couple of points about Dunlap and diversity…
Dunlap school district has had several large, low income apartment complexes for years. The PJStar even had a recent article about how diversified the new school over on Radnor Road is and how well the low-income students are performing on the state tests.
In all seriousness, are the low income apartments and residents left-over from the “old” Dunlap or are they new developments for low income residents?
(Gary’s comment was priceless.)
Ah yes… diversity. Sure Dunlap has a few poor folk. Lets see how it stacks up. According to the Interactive Illinois Report Card on school districts in Illinois, the info schools have to report to the state each year.
% Low Income
State: 40%
District 150: 66%
District 323: 5% Yeah… diverse.
How about ethnic diversity?
% White kids
State: 56.7%
District 150: 34.1%
District 323: 84.1%
% Black kids
State: 20.3%
District 150: 59.3%
District 323: 4.4% Ouch….
Link whoring: http://iirc.niu.edu/default.html