|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 18, 2013 22:19:14 GMT -6
Bruce Hart wants it on the January agenda to start the process of turning Monroe and Vermillion Streets to two way. I think it is a good idea, but I am surprised that he wants to jump into it before they even get to vote on the downtown plan, that I thought was supposed to address those issues.
I wonder if that means that they plan to just ignore the plan like they have past plans.
|
|
|
|
Post by Solitaire on Dec 18, 2013 22:41:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Dec 18, 2013 23:46:15 GMT -6
What it could mean is to start discussion on it. It will be a long process. Just because the city may want it doesn't mean it will happen. The state will have a say in it. Because of 18 heading both directions it would mean more traffic lights. The state has shot this down before when they did the renovation of bridge st. It doesn't hurt to start the process early. If it gets shot down by the state it's one less thing in the renovation plan and will speed up that process too,
|
|
|
|
Post by 1NAMillion on Dec 19, 2013 6:16:44 GMT -6
i I was under the impression that the changing of the streets wouldn't come for several years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 19, 2013 8:03:08 GMT -6
What it could mean is to start discussion on it. It will be a long process. Just because the city may want it doesn't mean it will happen. The state will have a say in it. Because of 18 heading both directions it would mean more traffic lights. The state has shot this down before when they did the renovation of bridge st. It doesn't hurt to start the process early. If it gets shot down by the state it's one less thing in the renovation plan and will speed up that process too, Doesn't the Vandewalle plan recommend making Main and Bridge two way as well? Why not start the process for them as well? If we just do two at a time, won't it be even more expensive? It just seems that someone made the decision that they are heading in one direction before the expensive planning process is even finished. Months ago, it was brought to their attention that sidewalk sales are illegal along with displaying any merchandise outside without a special use permit, but they would not take any action until after the plan is complete to see what it recommends. Months ago, another business brought up a parking problem keeping spots for his customers filled by nearby residents, but they would not take any action until the plan is finished to see what it recommends. Didn't they just say at last week's first draft presentation that it was not too late to give your input before the plan is finalized? Why did we even spend the money and time on the plan if they are just going to go off half cocked starting projects before the plan is even finished? It makes me wonder if they even plan to follow the plan. |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 19, 2013 8:28:09 GMT -6
Yes, I like that article too. There is a lot of opportunity downtown, it could be even better if the city were to take some action to support businesses other than bars. According to the Vandewalle plan though, the city will start buying the blighted vacant properties. They have one now at 220 E. Main Street. Do you want to see a picture to show how they keep downtown property? |
|
|
|
Post by willy on Dec 19, 2013 9:00:40 GMT -6
In the past, Bruce has brought up for discussion the possibility of returning Vermillion and Monroe streets from Bridge to Hickory street to two way traffic. The City has that authority and the costs of changing the lighting would be the City's responsibility. Like FOT said, changing east-west traffic through the city would have to be approved by IDOT and since it was their decision to make traffic flow on route 18 more fluid, I doubt it would happen. The recent changes to Bridge street and modifications on Main street would suggest IDOT wouldn't want two-way flow on either street. It would make sense to wait and see what Bruce Hart intends with his proposal before creating a frenzy on here. I don't think many people would want more stop and go traffic on Bridge and Hickory streets. Doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 19, 2013 9:08:11 GMT -6
In the past, Bruce has brought up for discussion the possibility of returning Vermillion and Monroe streets from Bridge to Hickory street to two way traffic. The City has that authority and the costs of changing the lighting would be the City's responsibility. Like FOT said, changing east-west traffic through the city would have to be approved by IDOT and since it was their decision to make traffic flow on route 18 more fluid, I doubt it would happen. The recent changes to Bridge street and modifications on Main street would suggest IDOT wouldn't want two-way flow on either street. It would make sense to wait and see what Bruce Hart intends with his proposal before creating a frenzy on here. I don't think many people would want more stop and go traffic on Bridge and Hickory streets. Doesn't make sense. I agree Willy, except I think it would make even more sense to wait for the plan, if there was any intention of actually following this one. Remember the one that suggested people live above downtown stores? When people did, they were publicly declared illegal, without even reading the rest of the zoning ordinance first. |
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Dec 19, 2013 10:17:25 GMT -6
I haven't read the plan. But if that is a recommendation then yes it should wait. Any proposed changes should wait. Someone should have mentioned that at the meeting when brought up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 19, 2013 10:52:03 GMT -6
I haven't read the plan. But if that is a recommendation then yes it should wait. Any proposed changes should wait. Someone should have mentioned that at the meeting when brought up. The plan is still being drafted. www.mywebtimes.com/news/local/streator-council-hears-downtown-plans/article_7cc4aeb4-d471-5ba5-8f84-deae74c644c5.htmlThe downtown redevelopment plan was likewise created around recommended initiatives and included the suggestion of expanding on the proposed Greenway Trail Project by the Vermilion River, the return of one-way streets — including Main and Bridge — to two-way streets When a citizen pushed the parking issue, the Mayor said that it should wait for the plan. When Bill Phelan brought up the outdoor sales issue, the Mayor said it should wait for the plan. There was no allowance for public comment after Mr Hart spoke. The Mayor did speak, but didn't say anything about him waiting for the plan. |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Dec 20, 2013 7:25:34 GMT -6
In the past, Bruce has brought up for discussion the possibility of returning Vermillion and Monroe streets from Bridge to Hickory street to two way traffic. The City has that authority and the costs of changing the lighting would be the City's responsibility. Like FOT said, changing east-west traffic through the city would have to be approved by IDOT and since it was their decision to make traffic flow on route 18 more fluid, I doubt it would happen. The recent changes to Bridge street and modifications on Main street would suggest IDOT wouldn't want two-way flow on either street. It would make sense to wait and see what Bruce Hart intends with his proposal before creating a frenzy on here. I don't think many people would want more stop and go traffic on Bridge and Hickory streets. Doesn't make sense. I agree Willy, except I think it would make even more sense to wait for the plan, if there was any intention of actually following this one. Remember the one that suggested people live above downtown stores? When people did, they were publicly declared illegal, without even reading the rest of the zoning ordinance first. No response? Well, I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't remember that plan. It was a comprehensive plan that was adopted by the city several years back. However, it was used so little that the city didn't even remember it when the downtown residency issue came up. Rather than read the plan or the entire zoning ordinance then, they determined that special use permits could be required and jumped on the opportunity to publicly declare business owners illegal residents, without even warning them or giving them a chance to defend against it first. As it turned out, some residents had been living there since before the law and others were not even required to have special use permits because of the Accessory Use portion of the law. I read that plan when the City adopted it. The recommendation that people live above stores downtown was the reason that I bought my building. I thought that the City was serious about doing what was in the plan, but obviously not, since they later falsely declared me illegal for following it. They have also failed to provide enforcement of our laws to make it a place suitable for people to live. Now here we are again spending big money on another plan. In my opinion, it is already being shown that there is no intention of following this one either. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2013 7:44:13 GMT -6
im to old to worry about this little stuff lol what ever they do is fine with me.
but i always did think the one way streets in this small town was fulish. do they still have any stores to shop in? lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2013 10:53:20 GMT -6
i say where can i buy a nice pair of shoes or a nice outfit anyone know.  its like living in ancona no place to shop  |
|
|
|
Post by rocket on Dec 20, 2013 16:37:37 GMT -6
making rt18 and 23 a 2 way highway in downtown is asking for trouble.
There will be more accidents in the downtown area then there ever has in history.
Leave the state highways one way.
|
|
|
|
Post by daviddr on Dec 20, 2013 23:08:48 GMT -6
This isn't a new idea. In the late '90s when I was on the council we looked into making all the north and south streets 2 way. The state killed the idea because the intersections are not wide enough for trucks to make right hand turns onto the side streets. The cost at that time would have been about $100,000 per intersection for new light signals and moving some of the poles further away from the corners. It wasn't long ago that a truck took out a light standard on the corner of Main and Park by Centrue bank because it didn't swing out far enough into the other lane when he attempted a right hand turn.
|
|
