Lynn Brown, aka Poison Pen, has jumped into the fray, once again, on the Peoria Journal Star website. Her insightful comments, speaking on behalf of her Uncle Earl, always are well-thought out and considered, of course. I'll touch base on a couple of them, just because it's Thanksgiving, and I have some free time right now.
She goes into a tirade about my not knowing about Peoria Heights history, and being pouty and angry over the Board going with the presentation from Jim Barnett, concerning the possible history area at the former Al Fresco Park site.
For more information regarding Galena Road and its issues in Peoria Heights, along with a short background on Al Fresco Park, please copy and paste the following:
http://villageofpeoriaheights.org/new/images/stories/Galena_Road_Packet.pdf
I still don't believe that creating a history park at the Al Fresco Park site, AT THIS TIME, is the right thing to do. If it even causes one person to get injured (and it almost certainly will), due to the craziness of the traffic along Galena Road at certain times of the day, then I feel we'll have some culpability about that accident. And, I don't mean that we're going to get sued by the injured party (but don't ever rule anything out when it comes to this stuff), I just mean that in that harsh reality, I feel we will be at fault for allowing this development to take place. When one person gets injured going into this park, or coming out of it, then that is one person that did not have to be injured. It's all well and good to say, "Well, heck, look at all of the other driveways, and entrances, and exits, and all and all, coming off of Galena Road already and..."
Yep, that's true. And look at the accidents that occur because of them. But, the Village does not have any direct attachment to the CREATION of ANY of them since this Galena Road has become a thoroughfare. I live on Terrace View Lane. Right off of Galena Road. It's been here since God knows when, back when Galena Road was a sleepy, two lane country trek. You'll find most, if not all, of the driveways, roads, etc. off of Galena Road, have been in existence from likely before the mid-50s. Most even earlier than that. IDOT has not allowed any NEW cut-ins along Galena Road probably for decades upon decades. We are aware of the problems involved with Galena Road as it is TODAY; and yet we're going to give the thumbs up to the creation of a park that's going to cause more turn-ins and more coming outs, into THIS traffic? I'm at a loss to understand why.
We already have letters from F/S and Casey's, both saying that the reason(s) they won't look at Galena Road for development is due to the SPEED of the vehicles, and the LACK of traffic lights; they both say that we have MORE than enough traffic along Galena Road already. This park will do nothing to spur on the lowering of the speed or having traffic lights put up. One posting party put on the PJStar website that the more congestion we create, the more likely we are to slow traffic down. Wha-? Things are congested plenty along Galena Road between 6-9 am, and 3-6 pm. It doesn't slow the speeders down AT ALL... you'd best just be ready to move out of the way if you're not going 55 MPH or higher.
I'm apparently alone in my assessment. To some, that makes me anti-development. Hardly. We've been pushing to have development like CRAZY, particularly through these troubling economic times. Creating the TIF at the Cohen's property; coming up with ways for the properties along War Memorial to be built up; we're doing all that we can right now, and I believe that we will see the fruits of those labors in relatively short order. I've pushed like a mad man (just ask Poison Pen) to have changes made along Galena Road by IDOT that will BRING really good commercial development to Galena Road. People can roll their eyes all they want to about that; just check out the letters from F/S and Casey's, and see for yourselves. But, a park directly off of Galena Road? With the way that Galena Road is now, I just don't think that's good development. Slow the traffic down to a 35 MPH speed limit; install two to three traffic signal lights along the road, and then I believe the Al Fresco site will be RIPE for our development, and can be made into a grand, and much SAFER, thing.
That's my opinion, and I certainly have a right to it; just as the Trustees have a right to theirs. The difference here is that the Trustees vote on every issue, and I only vote to break a tie. So my opinion is just that - my opinion. I'm not mad, I'm not pouty, I'm not even going to try and change any of the Trustees' minds about the potential development. We move on.
By the way, I included a page about recognizing the historical impact of Al Fresco Park, and also the Ronald Reagan Trail, at the land in question, in the "booklet" I put together about the problems along Galena Road. I'm well aware of many facets of the history of Peoria Heights, and how it's been ignored through the years. That still doesn't make the concept any safer.
Lynn then goes on to rip into the Ambulance Service again, quoting the figures about the costs of paying the paramedics, etc. As usual, she neglects to mention the revenues brought in by the Ambulance Service - which are substantial. It's the same old, same old. Ripping into the purchase of a new ambulance, even though it has just 60,000 miles on it. Those are hard miles, mind you. On top of that, the ambulance is a 1993 model. Time causes issues to mechanical things, just through weather and simple age. And, we're not talking about a truck that delivers gravel. We're talking about an AMBULANCE. The purchase of the ambulance was approved by the Board of Trustees 6-0... where does that leave Lynn?
She then goes on to tear into our decisions to have curbs and sidewalks installed without asking for contributions from the homeowners affected. My response would be - why should we? Just because that's the way it was done before? The property taxes of those who live on streets without curbs and storm sewers are not lower because they live on a street without curbs. They pay the same sales tax when they shop in the Village as those who already have curbs on their streets. In those areas where we have installed curbs... that is what should be the NORM in the Village. Taxpayers should not be penalized by the Village because they live on a street where storm sewers and curbs aren't in place. If we keep working at having storm sewers and curbs installed, at some point, ALL of the Village will have them. It is backwards and just WRONG to ask taxpayers to pay additional TAX money to have curbs installed on their streets when their neighbors a few blocks over might have had curbs for the past 50 years, and yet BOTH have been paying the SAME tax rate to the Village over the years. Explain to me, Lynn, how it is fair to DOUBLE tax those residents - just so your Uncle Earl could have more money available for Streetscape?
What I will give Lynn credit for is that she is consistent in her hatred for virtually everything that has happened over the past 5 and a half years; and she is consistent in her love and admiration for everything her Uncle Earl did during his 8 years in office. It will be interesting to see if the three Peoples Party trustee candidates will actually step up and say how much they agree with her. In case you haven't heard, the three Peoples Party trustee candidates are Charlie Gauf; Bryan Lammers; and Dave Parkinson. I have no idea who Lammers is, or what he stands for.
I know that Parkinson has expressed his disdain for everything that has happened over the past 5 and half years, and has taken time to write letters to the Journal Star, expressing those opinions. Parkinson has been adamant about having Streetscape on Prospect done; but has tempered that lately with wanting diagonal parking on his side of the street (Slim Clippins). Of course, diagonal parking along Prospect would be extremely dangerous, with the number of vehicles passing by every day. For those who don't believe me, go to the downtown Peoria post office during the noon hour of most days, park in a diagonal spot in the parking lot, and then try backing out. Put a mini van on one side of your vehicle, and a Ford F-350 on the other. Then, multiply the vehicles passing behind you by 10. You'll get a feel for the problems that would be caused. But, of course, Dave certainly knows better than Ray Picl Sr., Earl Carter, and me, and all of the people who have served on the Board of Trustees since diagonal parking was done away with on Prospect. Not even Streetscape had diagonal parking involved. We'd have to add about 3 more police officers to the employment roll, just to handle the additional accidents caused by that move.
Charlie Gauf has mentioned to me on a number of occasions about his problems with the WEEK-TV webcam installed on the Observation Tower. What he doesn't seem to grasp is that we're not paying $1,500.00 a month for the privelege of being able to see Prospect Road on WEEK's website - we're paying that amount for the ADVERTISING it brings. There are thousands of hits each day on the WEEK website, and we are given two advertising spaces on the website, for that cost per month. We also are given preferential treatment when it comes to reporting things going on in the Village, as well as receiving a number of mentions about the Heights and what's going on, by the on-air personalities. Why do advertising, at all? Because it WORKS. The first year that we gave money to the Chamber of Commerce to advertise the Village, our sales tax revenues rose by OVER 10%! In these uncertain economic times, it is imperative that we maintain our presence for shopping and going out to eat for today's customers.
No comments:
Post a Comment