I have a copy of the study done for the proposed "Streetscape," and it shows a "total project cost" of $4,960,000.00. That's in 2004 dollars. If you figure about a 10% increase (and, that's being charitable) each year for construction costs, you're up to about $8 million in 2009 money, but just for continuity's sake, I'll keep using the $5 million figure.
Once in a while, I will hear from a citizen or two, or a merchant or two (usually through a third party), that "Streetscape" was going to "solve the parking issues," really be "grand," etc.. I can almost guarantee that those people have not fully considered what would have emerged from the "Streetscape" plan that my opponent was pushing.
First, it was stated by my opponent that Prospect would "not be closed down" while construction was going on. So what? Go ahead and knock it down to one lane most of the day, with construction guys holding up "Stop" signs to let traffic through... yeah, it's not closed, but you will effectively turn away at least 50% of the traffic, I'd bet. This would have been MAJOR construction, you know.
All of the pavement; all of the sidewalks; all of the electrical, EVERYTHING was going to be ripped up and replaced. Do you think that could be done just on weekday nights, from midnight to 7 a.m.? How long would it take for business to drift away from the downtown area, due to construction? Can you say "immediately"? Ask the folks who had businesses at Gale Avenue and Forrest Hill in Peoria several years ago. How many of the shops along Prospect, from Kelly to Glen, could survive about a YEAR with this type of interruption? Can you say... "Just about none"?
That's if the weather would cooperate. It would have been horrendous... the construction alone would have completely destroyed what is there now, in one way or another. Don't let anyone tell you differently. People can still be schmoozed by folks who are well trained at "talking the game," but when you step beyond the talk, and start to consider the reality of the proposal, that's when one would be able to realize what such intense construction would have done to Prospect Road, and its merchants.
And, parking? The plans showed 2 possible public parking lots, but to the engineering firm's credit, the blurb inside of them said, "Future parking lot, location subject to change." Well, when I got into office, I pursued both property owners about getting those spots for parking NOW, and neither one was interested in selling. On top of that, both of them said that NO ONE from the previous administration, or from the engineering firm for "Streetscape" had even asked them about buying the lots for parking. Odd, don't you think?
These are just some of the issues with my opponent's "Streetscape" plans... I'll touch on the others soon.
What was the real point of streetscape? If the people who owned the land for the expanded parking areas hadn't even been contacted about it, it makes it sound as if streetscape was more in the fantasy planning stage rather than something on the road to reality. Wouldn't securing needed land be one of the first things to be ironed out? Poor planning, or poor reporting of intent?
ReplyDeleteNo, it was more than "on the road to reality." It had been planned for nearly four years; the securing of whatever grants could be had were long under way. What the previous administration had proven was that whatever big, expensive, and expansive plan it could come up with, somehow it was going to be done... and soon.
ReplyDeleteAnd, the point is this: if not those two parcels of land they showed as being "parking lots," which were the Globe Glass lot at Kelly and Prospect; and the parcel of land just south of the old Pabst office building (now where Williams Brothers put in landscaping), then WHERE?
I believe that the owners of those parcels of land were not contacted because there was never any intent to put parking lots there. They were drawn on the plans to placate the concerns of business owners along Prospect, and that's all. But, that's my opinion. Believe it or not, it is an EDUCATED opinion, from being "in the know" for the last few years, but still just my opinion.
Then, you might ask, "you need parking somewhere, right?"
I shall leave you with this cryptic response, "Not if the buildings along Prospect, from Kelly north to at least Duryea, are GONE, right?"
J.H.Christ yes it's cryptic but! I think your educated opinions are right. The son of a ***** is *fn crazy if not downright sneaky. No you didn't say it I did. How can I not. WHAT A FLAGRANT WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY, A DETRIMENT TO BUSINESS AND FLYING ASS GOOSE CHASE, AND FOR WHAT!!!? HE DIDN'T EVEN CONTACT THE PARCEL OWNERS, NOW WHY AM I NOT SURPISED. THANK GOD FOR SMALL FAVORS THOUGH! BECAUSE WHATEVER HE ULTIMATELY HAD PLANNED WOULDN'T BE GOOD.
ReplyDeleteWhat the hell is he thinking anyway, like we weren't going to find out he dummied the thing up. The engineering firm probably had to hold their nose. This SOB makes my blood boil!!!!!! No way will E.C. shister get back in