Will the new St. James Church cause a parking problem in Belvidere?

This is my concern.  Take a look at the letter I submitted to Belvidere Planning and Zoning regarding the issue.  I am asking only that the Church comply with the zoning mandate and provide one on-premise parking space for each five seats.  That equates to 170 on-site parking spaces now that the church is to hold only 850.  I wish the zoning law required more because I foresee cars clogging the streets in all directions. The Church’s architectural firm wants 110 spaces.

Click on the photocopy to enlarge or read the printed letter shown below the photocopies: 

Here is the two page letter portion in an easier to read format:

June 13, 2011

Belvidere Planning and Zoning Commission

615 North Main Street

Belvidere, Illinois 61008

REFERENCE: Case Number 2011-15; St. James Catholic Church

I oppose granting the applicant any deviation from City Code Section 150.204C3b. (One parking space per 5 seats at maximum capacity [Ratio 5:1 on premise spaces to capacity])

I am a St. James parishioner who regularly attends 10 AM Sunday mass. This service most always overcrowds the 350 capacity church. All parking spaces on parish grounds are filled and on-street parking for several blocks is jammed packed. The applicant is asking for a deviation from Section 150.204C3b because of the availability of on-street parking. I question whether adequate on-street parking will be available for the new 850 capacity church.

I have counted the current number of parking spaces available on parish property and identified them on an aerial map which is attached. Currently there are 130 parking spaces on parish property. The applicant indicates that once the new church is built and the old church torn down, there would only be 115 parking spaces. Diagonal parking would be built at applicant’s expense however it is questionable if this would increase parking on Church Street because only one side of the street will be parked after this change.

Page 3 of the applicant’s Narrative states that: “Random surveys conducted during mass in early 2011 show that parishioners currently use 70-80 on-street parking spaces in the near vicinity of the church along Julien, Caswell and Church Streets” If the code deviation is granted, on-street parking would have to supply all additional needed parking. Just multiplying the current on-street parking (as supplied by the applicant) by the increase in capacity (850/350 times the 70 current on-street slots) on-street parking increases approximately 143% to 170. Using figures more nearly matching the actual cars to church capacity ratio of the current church (see chart below), on-street parking increases 430% to 371 spots. (For an analysis of needed parking for a range of such ratios see Attachment 2)

Either figure would cause massive on-street parking stress in the St. James neighborhood as well as adjacent areas. Cars from St. James could well fill all the spots throughout these neighborhoods. Moreover, all worship services will be near capacity because the chief reason for the new church is to decrease the number of scheduled masses. Such massive parking issues could never have been imagined by the neighbors of the church when they moved to the area.

Old church parking --350 Church CAPACITY	New church parking-- 850 Church CAPAPCITY at current ratio
130 spaces on parish property 70 on-street parking per applicant’s survey 200 TOTAL spaces utilized CURRENT RATIO: 200 spaces/350 capacity (1.75)	115 spaces on parish property 371 on-street parking (maintaining 1.75 ratio) 486 TOTAL spaces utilized Ratio: 486 spaces/850 capacity (1.75) Bold Items Obtained by using the current ratio from old church survey

Should the church’s neighbors be required to supply the vast majority of the church’s parking? Using the chart shown on the previous page, it appears that on-street parking currently provides 35% (70/200) of St. James parking. Will you allow on-street parking to provide 76% (371/486) of the new St. James parking at maximum capacity?

It appears that staff is recommending approval of applicant’s deviation request regarding Section 150.204C3b, subject to the applicant providing (prior to occupancy permit) proof of attempts to buy, rent or lease 55 off-street parking spaces in the area. I am opposed to such action.

St. James Church has been notified by the actual owner of the church property, the Diocese of Rockford, that no construction can occur unless the parish deposits $1,000,000 with the diocese for this project and the parishioners sign pledges for approximately half of the projected building costs. Figures are supplied weekly to parishioners. Statements from the Building Committee indicate that these financial hurdles will not be reached until early 2012. I suggest that the city postpone further action on the application until the applicant provides a workable plan of action to acquire additional off-street parking sufficient to meet the code requirements of one parking space per five seats at maximum capacity.

St. James Catholic Church should agree to such a delay because it will have no material effect on its building schedule and the postponement will afford the church an opportunity to better inform the parish and community of its plans. The applicant’s Narrative indicates that until approximately two months ago, St. James intended to build this large church outside the city. Obviously there has been little or no opportunity to acquire additional property for parking at the current parish campus. If the applicant agrees to a postponement, the full plans (including additional on-premises parking) for the proposed St. James institutional district will be available for the public’s consideration.

On a more practical level, I pose this question: “Once the church is built, would the Planning Department or the City Council really refuse an occupancy permit to a church for not reasonably pursuing additional parking for this project?”

Hopefully my analysis will help you in your decision. I trust that you will agree that St. James’ requests should not be approves until applicant can provide adequate off-street parking.

WILLIAM J. PYSSON

9592 Denver Drive

Belvidere, Il 61008

815 544 5115

bpysson@yahoo.com

Boone County’s 2010 Audit was due June 1, 2011—Was Boone County granted an extension?

In 2008 Boone County did not provide its CPA audit for the fiscal year ending November 30, 2007 until August 20, 2008.  The public and board members did not have an opportunity to review that document until even later.  Since then I have made a personal effort to insure the audit is timely.  Boone County’s budget has annual appropriations of  less than $30,000,000 yet their annual audit was not timely in 2008 and has meet state requirements since then, only through specially requested extensions.

As set forth in 55 ILCS 5/6-31003

The audit shall commence as soon as possible after the close of each fiscal year and shall be completed within 6 months after the close of such fiscal year, unless an extension of time is granted by the Comptroller in writing. Such extension of time shall not exceed 60 days.

Boone County’s audit for the year ending November 30, 2010 should be available June 1, 2011, unless a 60 day extension is obtained.  Below is the answer I received to my request to review the audit. 

After you read the letter below—do you believe that the Illinois Office of the Comptroller is  “unable to generate the approval letter” for the extension?  Assume that the Comptroller wanted to grant the extension-- can it be granted without the Comptroller writing an extension letter?  Should the public, the CPA firm or the county accept this situation?

Click on the photocopy to enlarge:

Sycamore Attorney faces Prostitution Charges

On May 31, 2011 I reported this story and supplied several updates.  See:  http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2011/05/sycamore-attorney-faces-prostitution.html  I wish to thank Betsy Lopez in picking-up on the story and giving readers many new details.  Her story is on page 3c of the June 10, 2011 Rockford Register Star.

Boone County Fire Districts Agree to More Talking

County Fire Districts Agree to More Talking

By Bob Balgemann

The following is from page 2 of the June 10 Boone County Journal which is available free of cost at local merchants and also available on-line at:    http://boonecountyjournal.com/news/2011/Boone-County-News-06-10-11.pdf#page=3

Fire Districts #1, #2 and #3 the Boone County
Board still don’t agree on whether an ordinance should be in
place to require all commercial buildings to have sprinkler
systems.

But, after meeting June 2, they all agreed to communicate
better with one another in the future. Fire chiefs will revisit
the so-called “zero tolerance’’ ordinance and bring their
findings to the appropriate county committees.

Among those mentioned were public safety, health and
human services and zoning.
“The chiefs will come back with what they think
will work,’’ said attorney Brian O’Connor, representing
Districts #2 and #3.

The question of communication was almost immediately
placed on the table.

“This was kind of a surprise to everyone,’’ District #2
board member Laura Hart said of the ordinance. “Were there
any attempts to have community meetings in your districts
to see what people thought about it?’’

District #2 board member Cathy Ward wondered the
same thing, asking if it was just the chiefs who made this
decision or if others were involved? “This has been bubbling
up at meetings for a year now,’’ she added.

While District #1 Fire Chief Greg Holmes answered that
no community meetings were held, he assured that he had
talked to a lot of people about it, with 50 percent in favor of
the ordinance and 50 percent opposed to it.
“Would you be willing to have one now?’’ Hunt asked.
“Yes,’’ Holmes answered. While the county and fire
districts have had communication problems in the past, he
said, “It would be nice if the county and fire districts were
together on this. We legitimately felt we were doing the
right thing.’’

Fire officials remained firm June 2 in their belief that
sprinkler systems would save property and lives in Boone
County.

Ordinance in the Works Since 2007
District #3 Fire Chief Gail Worley said he started
working on the ordinance in 2007, when there was a lot
of construction in the Poplar Grove area. He said he had a
problem with one building owner who promised to put in
a sprinkler system but never did. “So I went to the village
board; we now have zero tolerance in the village of Poplar
Grove.’’

That prompted District #3 board member Terri Glass to
question the motivation behind the requirement. She said
she was concerned that it came about because Worley was
upset with one building owner.

Worley said that was not the case. Other owners, he
said, were constructing buildings that were just under the
minimum square-footage threshold for a sprinkler.

Cost entered the picture when Belvidere architect Paul
Ollmann said there can be financial difficulties “when you
have a $50,000 project and a $100,000 sprinkler system. He
estimated that a sprinkler system would cost $3 a square
foot.

Another architect, Gary W. Anderson, wrote in a letter to
the board that “such a requirement is over-reaching and will
create a significant financial hardship on everyone.’’
He wrote that the International Building Code used by
the county “has very sufficient requirements to provide
adequate protection of occupants and buildings. The IBC
is very specific as to when a fire protection sprinkler is
required.’’

But Holmes countered that most commercial buildings
without sprinkler systems that experience a major fire do
not rebuild. That leaves a vacant building and people out of
work, he said.
“Sprinkler systems will stop a fire cold,’’ consultant
Bob Olsen said. “It’s designed to save the building and put
people back to work.’’

Hunt attempted to temper the differing opinions by
explaining the county board’s job is to represent all residents.
Members got involved in this issue, she said, “when people
came to us saying the ordinance was affecting their ability to
make a living. This is a big deal with people.’’

Ireland's Catholics, hard hit by abuse crisis, await Vatican action - Faith & Reason

 

Diarmuid Martin is getting impatient. He's been a singular voice speaking out for action on this since 2009.

Maureen Dowd lionizes Martin in her weekend New York Times column and lambastes the Vatican in the process:

In return for doing the right thing, he has been ostracized by fellow bishops in Ireland and snubbed by the Holy See.

Showing again that it prefers denial to remorse, the Vatican undermined Martin's call for accountability. In 2009, after the Irish government's 700-page Murphy report on sexual abuse came out, Pope Benedict XVI refused to accept the resignations of two Irish bishops who presided over dioceses where abuse cases were mishandled.

The following year, when Martin expected to be named cardinal, the pope passed him over.

Ireland's Catholics, hard hit by abuse crisis, await Vatican action - Faith & Reason

Vatican takes more time to mull Irish sex abuse - SignOnSanDiego.com

 

The Vatican is taking several more months before making its recommendations on renewing the Catholic Church in Ireland following devastating revelations of clerical sex abuse and coverup.

The Vatican issued preliminary findings of its investigation into Irish dioceses, seminaries and religious orders, saying only that no further visits were warranted for dioceses and seminaries but that follow-up visits were necessary at some religious communities.

The Vatican said Monday it would come ahead with recommendations for the Irish church "in the coming months" and that a full report would be published in early 2012.

Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin has spoken out recently, criticizing the Vatican's slow pace, and Monday's statement was unlikely to satisfy those expecting more tangible results after Vatican investigators turned in their reports in April.

Since 2002, a government-organized compensation board has paid out more than euro800 million ($983 million) to 13,000 people abused in Ireland's church-run homes for children.

Vatican takes more time to mull Irish sex abuse - SignOnSanDiego.com

Public Bodies Are Paying over $7.4 million Annually to Lobbyists | Illinois Campaign for Political Reform

 

Local governments, transit agencies and other public bodies spent nearly $7.5 million in the last fiscal year on contracts with lobbyists hired to monitor and influence state officials, according to an annual survey conducted by the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform (ICPR).

Below are some nearby community government units and their lobbying cost.  The complete list is available at:  http://ilcampaign.org/sites/default/files/LGL-2011-POST.pdf

 

Public Bodies Are Paying over $7.4 million Annually to Lobbyists | Illinois Campaign for Political Reform