Riverside Info Topic: clear cutting downtown riverside

Riverside Info Topic: clear cutting downtown riverside http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Discussion Forum for Riverside Illinois en Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:04:18 +0000 spatny on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/4#post-796 Thu, 04 Jan 2007 20:01:04 +0000 spatny 796@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Here's the issue: How can anyone trust this Board to control their own urges? They want development in the form of condos so that they can raise money to pay for other things. They have said so. What else is there to talk about. If you want 200 new condos with ground floor retail space in the central district you back their position. If you think it is stupid, counterproductive and have the considered opinion that these people may be fine upstanding and honest toilers but have no sense or ability to deal with developers, the latter based on their track record, then you should be against the TIF proposal. Trusting these people - however well intentioned they may be - is tantamount to courting catastrophe. All you have to do is look at their record as regards Delaplaine Crossing, the Arcade and Village Center. Case closed. Catherine on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/4#post-712 Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:10:25 +0000 Catherine 712@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Corbi328: How can I prejudge a process I only heard about in late November, even though I live in the affected district? Yet one is expected to absorb all the information, make comparative studies, and come up with alternate suggestions. You, however, have obviously spent a great deal of time on it, and perhaps have become invested in redeeming that time. The rest of us are supposed to trust that the Board and its advisors know what is best for us. What I DO know is that the plan involves eminent domain, dense, vertical and unattractive development, and diversion of tax dollars for spending by people with a scant electoral mandate and a questionable spending history. MikeT on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-707 Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:34:20 +0000 MikeT 707@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ some quick impressions and an attempt at a summary... I can tell from Catherine's AND Corbi328's comments in this forum that they both care about Riverside deeply. However, there seems to be a difference of opinion on how to improve Riverside. One wants a tif and the other wants more of market driven/ordinance enforced approach. There also seems to possibly be a difference of opinion on the wages, or the side effects of medicine administered to Riverside. 1) For example, there seems to be a side of this issue that wants a c-ment garage on Pine to make it easier for retail and possibly high density housing more successful in the cbd, thus improving the EAV of the CBD. 2) Then there seems to be the other side that says that parking 'medicine' would cause too much adverse side effects to the patient, Riverside. In other words, it would be a Faustian deal where Riverside would sell its soul - its soul being such things as quiet, space, non-congestion, peace, for improved EAV. The (1) side says we need to do apply this medicine else the average taxes will go up significantly for Riversiders. I have a question for the (1) side (pro tif in cbd): are there hard numbers that project some of the shortfall and consequent tax increases? That would help everyone in seeing the possible consequences of no tif. mike corbi328 on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-702 Tue, 02 Jan 2007 12:31:26 +0000 corbi328 702@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Catherine, It's obvious from your comments in this thread and others that you have prejudged this whole process. You believe it's all a farce and don't believe that anyone involved other than yourself genuinely has the interests of the town and its residents at heart. That's unfortunate because it is not true. Catherine on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-699 Tue, 02 Jan 2007 10:32:44 +0000 Catherine 699@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ The call for input you describe is but mere compliance with the Open Meetings Act. Everybody knows there is no "opportunity" for citizen input on Jan 8. Few will be able to endure the soporific sound of the choir preaching to itself. It's not too expensive to send out the water bills; nor too expensive to divert tax money from taxing bodies and put it in the hands of the Board, it's not too much to spend $406K on recreation: I don't understand how anyone could think it too expensive to send out such a notice in a participatory democracy. Many people like myself do not read the trashy local newspapers, subscribe to television, etc. Perhaps that is why I needed this group to advise me of the impending TIF when my government failed to do so. corbi328 on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-696 Tue, 02 Jan 2007 09:18:36 +0000 corbi328 696@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Mike, The invitation has been made to people on this forum, it was refernced in the last two board meetings that were shown on TV and both the Suburban Life and Landmark have made reference to a forthcoming discussion at the next Committee of the Whole meeting on January 8th. I don't know how much more dissemination you want. Do you realize how expensive it would be to print up a newletter and send it out with the water bills (as you suggested in another thread)? If people have any interest in the subject matter, I am sure they are aware of the opportunity on the 8th. idic5 on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-695 Tue, 02 Jan 2007 03:22:30 +0000 idic5 695@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ corbi328 said-- ...I urge everyone to seize this initial opportunity to be heard by providing constructive comments/issues to Katie Rush for the Board to take up for discussion at the Committee of the Whole meeting on January 8th It should be made very clear that, tho I appreciate any invitation by the Village administration for input into the next part of the tif process, this invitation was not, apparently, made to 'everyone'. Unless I am mistaken, it was extended to users of this forum. Great forum that it is, I doubt that it is everyone in Riverside affected by this issue. and corbi328 said-- Let's stop focusing on what happened in the past... One good reason to examine and make clear the past is to NOT repeat the same mistakes again. Gain lessons, then we as a Village can move on with those lessons learned a better village. For example, I think there has been a lack of incremental information dissemination on the tif/tod, so in the future the Village should try to get better at it. ALL-Have a good new year! mike corbi328 on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-685 Sun, 31 Dec 2006 08:49:52 +0000 corbi328 685@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Elisa, I don't find these two statements to be contradictory. Since the Board began contemplating the TIF there have been many opportunities for residents to provide input. These opportunities may not have been well disseminated to the average Riverside resident, but they were there. Some input was provided but obviously many more have an opinion. That is why the Board has decided to pause now and give everybody an opportunity to speak up. Let's stop focusing on what happened in the past, that is water under the bridge. If you are truly concerned about the best interests of Riverside, I urge everyone to seize this initial opportunity to be heard by providing constructive comments/issues to Katie Rush for the Board to take up for discussion at the Committee of the Whole meeting on January 8th. Ultimately though, it's up to the Board to decide what is right for Riverside. We elected them to be our leaders and to make the tough decisions on behalf of the Village. I strongly believe the Board is best positioned to consider all of the elements that are intertwined in this issue and make a decision that is truly in best interest of Riverside as a whole, free of the bias and emotion that many of us exhibit. Elisa on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-675 Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:58:46 +0000 Elisa 675@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ "Just to clarify, the TIF has been studied and discussed for almost two years. Resident participation was always requested and desired. Information on meeting times for this issue and others is regularly posted on the Village's web site." "The board's job is to make executive decisions based on what THEY think is in the best interest of the town. They were in the process of doing so when they realized there was significant concern and uncertainty about the TIF among some. Even though they did not have to, they took a pause so that everyone's concerns could be heard and considered." Corbi - I have been reading your comments for a while now, and I firmly believe that you are a smart man who is willing to stand by his convictions ~ which I respect. I noticed, though, that these two comments are sort of in opposition of each other. The earlier comment states very clearly that you felt that the Village solicited input from the residents. The second comment seems to suggest that the Village was just plugging along innocently and then discovered almost by chance that some people were upset by the possibility of a TIF and then responded. It really can't be both ways, though. I think you are honest, so I am left to wonder if your earlier comment about how proactive the Village was over the past two years about the TIF discussion (or in my opinion, the lack thereof) was made in ignorance. (I do NOT mean to imply that you are ignorant at all, but rather that you heard people in the Village state that they had given the residents ample opportunity to pipe up about this topic and you believed in good faith that they had.) The way facts have been misconstrued and misinterpreted is what makes me wonder about anything that is said by our elected officials. How do we know what to believe? idic5 on "clear cutting downtown riverside" http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/clear-cutting-downtown-riverside/page/3#post-673 Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:31:54 +0000 idic5 673@http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/ Let's take a step back. I agree with Elisa, KathleenRush, Catherine, and Corbi328. :) I appreciate the opportunity to give some input into alternative solutions going forward. Let's hope that they are taken seriously and it is not simply a bone to the hoipolloi. Because of the holidays and my lack of genius, in the next 4-5 days, to craft a solution to Riverside's commercial vitality problems that have plagued it since the early 80's at least and despite me staying up and not sleeping and obsessing about this since I learned --blindsided-- of this on Halloween (not "blindsided")... I will try my best to get some alternatives into the Village Manager by 1/4. Can it be via email, Ms Rush? I am also remembering what Mr Wiaduck told us that first meeting on 11-9 at the commisioner meeting: There will be many many opportunities for the community to ask questions and provide input. I recall the 'many many', and I was relieved to hear that then since this is so important, big, and complicated of an issue for Riverside. I got 5 minutes in November, and 5 minutes in December; at this rate I'll have my public input done in 23 years. thanks, Kim, and Holly, for the website. I also see that Ms Rush suggested a similar thing as Mr Wiaduck... "I am sure the Board will include many opportunities for additional discussion on the above questions." Have a good New Year. mike . After more thought, I must add the following post script on my phrase above 'this is a very important matter to Riverside". This post script is a bit of a resolution for me of differing fragments that are hanging around this forum: the board is educated about the community, there was a dearth of incremental information on TOD/TIF, and TOD/TIF is a major development proposal in itself. **Agreed that the BOARD is EDUCATED about Riverside constituents. I recall the big hullabullu in town when there was a 'little old development' planned to extend the Bemis bike path into Riverside some time ago (I guess it has come up recently, too). The conclusion I made in that episode was that many Riversiders like Riverside quiet, a refuge from the city, and the like. During that episode, in conversations with other Riversiders, I also came away with the idea that they want Riverside a well kept secret. As a semi proponent of the bike path, I had thought that bringing people into town would expose, PR-like, Riverside and maybe bring in some biz to help our cbd. But, as Ms Rush clarified for us, The board knows this episode, and knows the sensibility of most of the town. **THIS KNOWLEDGE the Board possesses of what makes Riversiders come and stay here, I am convinced, is why we see a dearth of incremental information that Elisa has painstakingly unearthed for us - thankyou Elisa for the work, btw. In other words, if the administration had made their plans and intentions very clear from the beginning and during each step, I believe, they knew there would have been a hub-bub (spelling?) and there would not have been sufficient traction to get the proposal moving. TOD is a great example. My neighbor and I should have received certified letters telling us of the meetings that were called to consider the demolition of our houses, even as a study, even as an option. Of course, I would have brought in my point of view then as I have tried to now. It may have been a different TOD with this community stakeholder's+ view point included. URS did not know my house *probably* satisfies historic landmark status, and was pictured in general newspaper articles on Riverside, for example. **Will TOD/TIF Riverside Redevelopment Plan Clear Cut Riverside?. Like my house, it 'may'. **ALL WOULD AGREE: It certainly is A LOT BIGGER THAN a BIKE PATH EXTENSION! So, like mr robling has advised us, whatever we do, let us do it right. . thanks for listening. again. mike 56 pine +see TOD, Community Involvement, 1-2, first line. All commnunity stakeholders did not participate. If we were not stakeholders in the taking of our houses, no one is.