This blog was started to share the idea of forming a "Springfield Illinois Historic Neighborhoods Council" (SPI-HNC). This will be an alliance of associations and individuals interested in advocating for older established neighborhoods in Springfield Illinois. Previously CNA (Council of Neighborhood Associations) represented all neighborhood associations in Springfield. However, we believe centrally located neighborhoods have much different needs and interests than outlying areas. SPI-HNC can best represent central Springfield with a wider base of support than other organizations.
Areas of immediate concern we plan to address include, Facilities Planning in Springfield Public School District #186 and the lack of infrastructure maintenance and improvements in the central neighborhoods. These issues are just symptoms of an overall larger problem, the tendency toward urban sprawl in the greater Springfield area, which extends infrastructure, utilities, police and fire protection further out to newly developed areas, which spreads the available tax money thinner and results in fewer resources available for maintenance, repairs, improvement and replacement of infrastructure in older neighborhoods.
Please see the next post regarding joining our group on "LinkedIn" and other posts listed at right .
Thanks, Bill
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Friday, December 5, 2008
Join SPI-HNC on "LinkedIn"
If you want to participate in this effort but can't commit to attending meetings, sign up for the "LinkedIn" online network. It's free and membership will allow you to join a group created with the same name as this blog. This can be a very efficient and effective way to stay informed and contribute to our efforts.
LinkedIn tends to be focussed on professionals. Other online networks like MySpace and Facebook are more geared to young members, musicians and artists.
Here is a link to the LinkedIn web page.
http://www.linkedin.com/
Please consider signing up and joining our group.
LinkedIn tends to be focussed on professionals. Other online networks like MySpace and Facebook are more geared to young members, musicians and artists.
Here is a link to the LinkedIn web page.
http://www.linkedin.com/
Please consider signing up and joining our group.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Sustainable School Siting: Location & Walkability
Wednesday, December 3, 2008, a public forum on "Sustainable Schools in Illinois: The Significance of School Location and Walkabality" was held at Lincoln Public Library to discuss issues on site decisions for public schools in Illinois by Lt. Governor, Pat Quinn’s staff. It involved a panel discussion followed by public comment and discussion.
Lt. Governor Quinn's report on the meeting
My notes on the meeting follow:
Jon Zirkle, from the Lt. Governor Pat Quinn’s office made introductions and explained about some of the other initiatives the Lt. Gov. has going on. Learn about these at: www.standingupforillinois.org/green/
The first presentation was by Mr. Royce Yeater, Midwest Director of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Mr. Yeater indicated the Trust is concerned with the trend of closing old smaller schools to which students can walk and cycle in favor of building larger schools on the edge of town. Too often schools effectively become “the advance scouts of urban sprawl - they are built and families flock around them.”
Mr. Yeater also referred us to a great source for information on preserving neighborhood schools on the National Trust for Historic Preservation web site, which can be found at: www.preservationnation.org/issues/historic-schools/
Through this page you can also link through to a page on the “Historic Neighborhoods Schools” project and information on the Helping Johnny Walk to School: Sustaining Communities through Smart School Siting Policies program. A program inspired by the "Why Johnny Can't Walk to School" report, a very compelling argument for renovating older schools rather than building new ones.
Mr. Yeater also commented on an effort that has been underway at The Council of Educational Facility Planners to reevaluate old antiquated standards, which were very rigid. The old standards would have required, for example, given X number of students at a School, we recommend Y number of acres of land to be “up to standards”. This often resulted in the one-size-fits-all mentality and the suburban throwaway school model.
Mr. Yeater suggested to Mr. Bill Looby (the only District 186 board member or administrator I noticed present), that when cost comparisons are made between building a new school versus renovating and expanding an existing one, be sure all of the costs to taxpayers are factored in, not just the costs that must be paid by the school district. These others would include infrastructure, transportation by both district and parents and expanded areas to be covered by police and fire protection. He said often times school districts overlook these costs because they are borne by federal, state and other local sources of funds, but are still all related costs that are passed onto the taxpayers.
He also said there often is a disconnect between school district planning and other local governmental units such as the city and park district. Cooperative efforts often yield much more efficient results. The public and the school district can share sporting facilities. Urban districts that “have it all” (football stadiums, practice fields, track and field facilities, soccer fields, baseball diamonds, health club type workout facilities, etc. etc.) often see those facilities sitting vacant most of the time. Cooperative use by several schools and others will be more easily accepted by the community and more economical. He also mentioned grant programs through USEPA that may help pay for some costs.
Dr. Roy Smith, District Superintendent for CUSD #303 in Lovington, Illinois. Dr. Smith discussed their situation in a small town school district where they have been using and improving the same school buildings for over one hundred years. Their schools are in great shape and are in an ideal location in the center of town to allow for kids and family members to walk and bike there to classes and other after school activities. Dr Smith described an instance when an architect told them they needed to spend over a million dollars to make certain improvements, that were “required” his response was “you’re fired”. The next architect was able to bring things up to snuff for around $30,000. The lesson here, I guess, is the “experts” don’t always operate with the same set of values as the taxpayers and clear-thinking administrators (like Dr. Smith) do. See their web site at: www.lovington.k12.il.us/index.htm
Don Moss, Landmarks Illinois. Mr. Moss explained how his organization is concerned with the preservation of historic buildings in Illinois and explained the “Ten Most Endangered Historic Places” program and encouraged us to nominate structures for the 2009 list: www.landmarks.org/media_coverage.htm
Megan Holt, IDOT Safe Routes to School Coordinator explained how the Childhood Obesity Epidemic is probably more appropriately named Childhood Inactivity Epidemic. She sited statistics on the number of kids walking to school declined from 40% (87% within one mile of school) in 1969 to a scant 16% (63%) in 2002 and the trend has probably not changed, but gotten worse in the six years since. She also stated the number one reason parents gave for their kids not walking or biking to school was the distance to school. www.dot.il.gov/saferoutes/saferouteshome.aspx
Initiatives of the “Safe Routes” program include promoting the local school as a social center for a neighborhood, and promoting legislation to require all public road improvements to include multi-modal accommodations (for walking and biking as well as powered vehicles).
A public comment session followed at which I (Bill Castor) spoke to thank all of the participants for this program, which is very timely given the activity in our local school district. Naturally I voiced my strong support for renovating and expanding the Springfield High School campus and structures at its current location. If you wish to see an extensive discussion as to why I feel that is best choice visit the Vinegar Hill Neighborhood Association web site and read the “Hard Lessons” editorial and the “VHNA Position Paper”. Links to both papers are on the home page: www.vhna.net
Tony Leone, another VHNA Board member and Springfield Historian and Preservationist also spoke in support of our position on SHS.
Other local speakers included school board member Bill Looby, who appears to support redevelopment of SHS at the current site and RUDAT member Chuck Pell, who simply repeated RUDAT’s official position shared by Paul O’Shea (who attended but did not speak to the group) that RUDAT should not stick their collective neck out. It is too preliminary. They need more time to thoroughly study the issue. It is a very complicated issue. It should be examined by the architects being hired in the upcoming feasibility study before they will take a position on it.
My response to Mr. Pell's comments is that while facilities planning can be complicated, the choice of whether to move Springfield High School west of Veterans Parkway, or expand it at its current location is not at all. Moving it would result in the majority of Springfield High School students needing to be transported way out to the west end of the district and it would be a HUGE missed opportunity to improve an area that the RUDAT report likened to bombed-out post World War II Germany. While it's true the proposal to build a new high school on the west end of the district included keeping something in the current building, moving 1,500 student seats out of historic central neighborhoods to the far west side of the district is still a huge loss, and would result in continued decline of the central neighborhoods.
I guess I’ll just be patient, as from what I continue to hear from most experts, like the panelists who presented to us mentioned above, and the Michigan Land Use Institute (see separate post), contemporary thinking about smart urban school planning and siting tend to support our position of keeping the school in a central location.
Then again, Springfield has not historically been a model community for good urban planning, so we need to remain diligent on this issue.
Lt. Governor Quinn's report on the meeting
My notes on the meeting follow:
Jon Zirkle, from the Lt. Governor Pat Quinn’s office made introductions and explained about some of the other initiatives the Lt. Gov. has going on. Learn about these at: www.standingupforillinois.org/green/
The first presentation was by Mr. Royce Yeater, Midwest Director of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Mr. Yeater indicated the Trust is concerned with the trend of closing old smaller schools to which students can walk and cycle in favor of building larger schools on the edge of town. Too often schools effectively become “the advance scouts of urban sprawl - they are built and families flock around them.”
Mr. Yeater also referred us to a great source for information on preserving neighborhood schools on the National Trust for Historic Preservation web site, which can be found at: www.preservationnation.org/issues/historic-schools/
Through this page you can also link through to a page on the “Historic Neighborhoods Schools” project and information on the Helping Johnny Walk to School: Sustaining Communities through Smart School Siting Policies program. A program inspired by the "Why Johnny Can't Walk to School" report, a very compelling argument for renovating older schools rather than building new ones.
Mr. Yeater also commented on an effort that has been underway at The Council of Educational Facility Planners to reevaluate old antiquated standards, which were very rigid. The old standards would have required, for example, given X number of students at a School, we recommend Y number of acres of land to be “up to standards”. This often resulted in the one-size-fits-all mentality and the suburban throwaway school model.
Mr. Yeater suggested to Mr. Bill Looby (the only District 186 board member or administrator I noticed present), that when cost comparisons are made between building a new school versus renovating and expanding an existing one, be sure all of the costs to taxpayers are factored in, not just the costs that must be paid by the school district. These others would include infrastructure, transportation by both district and parents and expanded areas to be covered by police and fire protection. He said often times school districts overlook these costs because they are borne by federal, state and other local sources of funds, but are still all related costs that are passed onto the taxpayers.
He also said there often is a disconnect between school district planning and other local governmental units such as the city and park district. Cooperative efforts often yield much more efficient results. The public and the school district can share sporting facilities. Urban districts that “have it all” (football stadiums, practice fields, track and field facilities, soccer fields, baseball diamonds, health club type workout facilities, etc. etc.) often see those facilities sitting vacant most of the time. Cooperative use by several schools and others will be more easily accepted by the community and more economical. He also mentioned grant programs through USEPA that may help pay for some costs.
Dr. Roy Smith, District Superintendent for CUSD #303 in Lovington, Illinois. Dr. Smith discussed their situation in a small town school district where they have been using and improving the same school buildings for over one hundred years. Their schools are in great shape and are in an ideal location in the center of town to allow for kids and family members to walk and bike there to classes and other after school activities. Dr Smith described an instance when an architect told them they needed to spend over a million dollars to make certain improvements, that were “required” his response was “you’re fired”. The next architect was able to bring things up to snuff for around $30,000. The lesson here, I guess, is the “experts” don’t always operate with the same set of values as the taxpayers and clear-thinking administrators (like Dr. Smith) do. See their web site at: www.lovington.k12.il.us/index.htm
Don Moss, Landmarks Illinois. Mr. Moss explained how his organization is concerned with the preservation of historic buildings in Illinois and explained the “Ten Most Endangered Historic Places” program and encouraged us to nominate structures for the 2009 list: www.landmarks.org/media_coverage.htm
Megan Holt, IDOT Safe Routes to School Coordinator explained how the Childhood Obesity Epidemic is probably more appropriately named Childhood Inactivity Epidemic. She sited statistics on the number of kids walking to school declined from 40% (87% within one mile of school) in 1969 to a scant 16% (63%) in 2002 and the trend has probably not changed, but gotten worse in the six years since. She also stated the number one reason parents gave for their kids not walking or biking to school was the distance to school. www.dot.il.gov/saferoutes/saferouteshome.aspx
Initiatives of the “Safe Routes” program include promoting the local school as a social center for a neighborhood, and promoting legislation to require all public road improvements to include multi-modal accommodations (for walking and biking as well as powered vehicles).
A public comment session followed at which I (Bill Castor) spoke to thank all of the participants for this program, which is very timely given the activity in our local school district. Naturally I voiced my strong support for renovating and expanding the Springfield High School campus and structures at its current location. If you wish to see an extensive discussion as to why I feel that is best choice visit the Vinegar Hill Neighborhood Association web site and read the “Hard Lessons” editorial and the “VHNA Position Paper”. Links to both papers are on the home page: www.vhna.net
Tony Leone, another VHNA Board member and Springfield Historian and Preservationist also spoke in support of our position on SHS.
Other local speakers included school board member Bill Looby, who appears to support redevelopment of SHS at the current site and RUDAT member Chuck Pell, who simply repeated RUDAT’s official position shared by Paul O’Shea (who attended but did not speak to the group) that RUDAT should not stick their collective neck out. It is too preliminary. They need more time to thoroughly study the issue. It is a very complicated issue. It should be examined by the architects being hired in the upcoming feasibility study before they will take a position on it.
My response to Mr. Pell's comments is that while facilities planning can be complicated, the choice of whether to move Springfield High School west of Veterans Parkway, or expand it at its current location is not at all. Moving it would result in the majority of Springfield High School students needing to be transported way out to the west end of the district and it would be a HUGE missed opportunity to improve an area that the RUDAT report likened to bombed-out post World War II Germany. While it's true the proposal to build a new high school on the west end of the district included keeping something in the current building, moving 1,500 student seats out of historic central neighborhoods to the far west side of the district is still a huge loss, and would result in continued decline of the central neighborhoods.
I guess I’ll just be patient, as from what I continue to hear from most experts, like the panelists who presented to us mentioned above, and the Michigan Land Use Institute (see separate post), contemporary thinking about smart urban school planning and siting tend to support our position of keeping the school in a central location.
Then again, Springfield has not historically been a model community for good urban planning, so we need to remain diligent on this issue.
Hard Lessons: School Construction
“Hard Lessons: Causes and Consequences of Michigan’s School Construction Boom” is a report published by Michigan Land Use Institute about a study it performed funded by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. The report is exactly on-point with many issues currently facing District 186. The following is a synopsis of the report’s recommendations to their state school superintendent:
1. Encourage school districts to invite richer and broader discussion with all segments of the community about how best to provide better facilities, preferably in town.
2. Renovate existing schools as a top priority; construct new schools in existing neighborhoods as the next priority; and construct new schools in farm fields as a last resort. Reduce costs with efficient design and shared athletic facilities.
3. Provide safe routes to school so kids can walk or bike to their classes and after school activities.
4. Improve the process of comparing costs of building a new school versus renovating an old one by paying for independent assessments, including short and long-range land, infrastructure, staffing and transportation costs.
5. When new construction is warranted, require schools to be built where roads, storm sewers, sanitary sewers, and water service already exist.
6. Strongly encourage schools to stay in existing neighborhoods.
7. Require school boards to submit a much more rigorous analysis and technical justification for closing existing schools.
8. Provide additional incentives, such as tax-increment financing tools, to upgrade school buildings in urban school districts.
I have attended most District 186 School Board meetings since November 2007 and briefly spoken twice. Monday, December 1, 2008, I signed-up and waited nearly two hours to bring this report to the attention of the board and others interested in the welfare of our schools and community. I was denied the opportunity to speak for the two minutes I requested.
Interestingly, since I emailed this report to board members earlier that Monday, the board chair assured me they had seen it before. Apparently, the board and its facilities committee had judged the content of this report not pertinent to the discussion of Springfield’s school facilities planning, so it was never discussed openly in a meeting. If you find this all a little difficult to believe, please see for yourself. Monday’s school board meeting will be broadcast many times in the upcoming two weeks on Comcast Channel 22 and the text of the Hard Lessons report is available online at: http://www.mlui.org/growthmanagement/fullarticle.asp?fileid=16633
The report concluded “The decisions districts make…help determine where families and businesses locate and whether those communities prosper or wither,” and “taxpayers and businesses are spending tens of millions of dollars on new schools in ways that weaken many communities while stimulating inefficient development on farmland and open space.” I hope Dr. Milton and members of the Board of Education appreciate the implications these have to our efforts here in Springfield.
Bill Castor, President
Vinegar Hill Neighborhood Association
www.vhna.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)