Home » Downtown »Politics/Policy » Currently Reading:

Public Hearing Today On Citation Against Lure Nightclub

September 3, 2010 Downtown, Politics/Policy 32 Comments

Today at 10am a public hearing will be held in City Hall (Rm 208) regarding a citation from the city against the nightclub Lure, located at 1204 Washington Ave.

lure-5069

“In a letter to Lure dated July 28 the city accused Lure of having improper employees and blamed its patrons for three acts of violence occurring near Lure on Thursday nights or early Friday mornings dating back to last November. Those complaints include a June 11 report in which people in a nearby parking lot allegedly fired an assault rifle at police.” (RFT Blog)

I attended a meeting at Lure recently where members of the Trupiano family make their case about how they manage Lure.

lure-5778I can’t make the hearing but I know I will get reports from people in attendance.  Some will say downtown residents are just being NIMBY‘s while others will say they like nightlife but say other establishments are better neighbors.

– Steve Patterson

 

Currently there are "32 comments" on this Article:

  1. Tony Palazzolo says:

    Lets see – The area has been an entertainment district for decades. I would have a hard time taking someone seriously that bought a condo in an enterainment district then complained about the entertainment.

     
    • Of course millions in tax dollars were spent to convert the area from a weekend only club district into a 24/7/365 neighborhood. I'm not saying the complaints are necessarily warranted, I don't live in the immediate area.

       
    • Christian_saller says:

      What do shootings, belligerent drunks, antisocial behavior and lax management have to do with entertainment?

       
      • samizdat says:

        Perhaps if the residents were seen as hosts, and the club-goers as guests, some would understand the nature of the argument coming from the individuals living in the vicinity. When one use dominates the district, or any other locale, it's difficult to recover an area for multiple uses. As someone who lives just a few doors down from Marquette Park in Dutchtown, I have my share of issues with those who often use the park, primarily those who have taken to playing soccer since the film was shot in part there in '03, the year my wife and I moved in. I welcome the use of the field on Louisiana Ave. for athletic endeavors. However, playing LOUD thumping music and speeding around corners with squealing tires, and the trash left behind in the park and in the streets in completely unacceptable. For what it's worth, the park hadn't been used for soccer when we moved in. Some t-ball, a guy using it as a driving range, some softball games. That was it. Even the year after filming, pretty much nothing happened. Then the folks started coming in '05, and now nearly every late afternoon/evening and weekend, a soccer game or practice (there's a girls' team practicing this year) occurs. Not a problem. But, again, the bad apples who think life revolves them and them only make living near the Park somewhat more difficult. I have the police non-emergency number on speed-dial. Most of the calls are in reference to the boomcars which are often present when the games/practices occur. To say I should have no expectation of a livable environment simply because someone–erroneously–feels it's their right to behave like an ass shows a clear misunderstanding of what rights one has in this country. The Constitution clearly gives you free speech rights (music). However, you DO NOT have the right to play that music at any volume, in any location, or at any time. Nor does anyone have the right to operate their motor vehicle in any fashion they that amuses them. Including the idiot (and friends; ugh) on my street with the sportbike who likes to do wheelies and rev-limit his motor while taking joy/test rides around the nabe. There are limits to our rights, and we have the responsibility to recognize them. To the morons who will inevitably suggest we move, I give you a solid middle finger salute. Cheers. ps: agreeing with you, Mr. Saller. Probably should have posted as a stand alone.

         
        • JZ71 says:

          Your rant points out the fundamental issue – everyone has different threshoilds between “acceptable” and “unacceptable”. My wife gets would up every time the yappy little dog next door barks, while, to me, it's just background noise. The loud music and occasional pools of vomit that marked dorm living in college don't seem so amusing when you're 50. And while crimes like shootings, burglary and wanton vandalism are never acceptable, there are limits to what either the police or club owners can really do on both public property or on someone else's private property, like parking lots, short of having a cop stationed every 200'. We want protection and enforcement, but we're not willing to double our taxes to triple our police force. Yes, patrons SHOULD act like guests at all times, and yes, a certain percentage will be a-holes, especially with alcohol involved. Taco Bell may wrap the burrito, but they're not the ones throwing the wrapper on the ground a block away. Short of having unruly patrons arrested, the most a club can do is to eject them. The problem is not the clubs, it's (some of) the patrons they attract. So, yes, if there were no clubs, you likely would have no patrons, and fewer of these problems, but you could also have more problems from arson, vagrancy and drug sales. Samizdat, if there were no park, there would be no soccer games, and likely less traffic, but it sounds like you'd still be stuck with your future organ donor. Urban living can be, and many times is, messy, and includes tradeoffs. And when it comes to personal behavior / interpersonal friction, you either gotta embrace it, work to change it, or concede defeat, and find a “better” environment . . .

           
          • samizdat says:

            Well, I realize I may come off sounding rather strident. However, there is a certain level of chaos which I will label as “meh, whattya gonna do?”, so I'm not constantly ringing up the STLPD in an effort to quiet the mob. I actually like all of the activity in the Park, puts eyes on the street, and all that. But I'm leery of too much “activity”, such as the two or so gunshots I heard over there earlier in the week. I really am a reasonable fella. But we all have our limits, and I am trying to help the nabe and the police establish a few stops to the most egregiously bad behavior. I mean, I mention trash on the streets, but some of that may be due to the absolutely STUFFED receptacles surrounding the Park afterward. So most people are being nice. It is what it is. Have a good Labor Day weekend everybody. Come down to the Park and see a game or two. I guarantee you'll see one or more. Just do me a favor 'K? Keep your stereos at a reasonable volume, if ya' don't mind;) Louisiana and Gasconade.

             
        • Christian_saller says:

          Some people subscribe to a perplexing and distorted view of what “city living” is or is supposed to be. Too many think that those of us who want to live in an urban environment do so because of some perverse penchant to live amid chaos and societal dysfunction. This view betrays a warped perspective on the city rather than an accurate assessment of the urban life most want. In the warped view, all pejorative connotations of “urban” are the standard and reality of what life is like in a picturesque ghetto ringing with gunfire and awash in folkloric squalor. Most people I know who live in cities do so for specific reasons, none of which involve the romance of poverty or “grit”. For some, it's the architecture, others say it's the sense of community they do not feel in other places. Others like the density and convenience. So, if you move to Soulard, expect to deal with some wildness on Mardi Gras and the regular ring of revelers when the bars close every weekend. This expectation does not include some urban inevitability of drunks puking on your shoes, threatening you with bodily harm, or driving into your living room. All bars are not created (or managed) equal.

           
          • JZ71 says:

            You're headed down an interesting path with your opening statement. Are you referring to the hip hop generation/gangsta attitude prevelent among certain segments of society? Or, are you questioning the single-parent, welfare lifestyle that seems to be creating a generation that's never been taught what respect, of themselves and of others, entails? You're right most people don't want to live in the middle of “chaos and societal dysfunction”, even in poorer neighborhoods, but there seems to be a minority of our population who do seem to thrive in such conditions, whether they're drug-dealing black gang members or meth-cooking white hoosiers. Do we need move to the Singaporean model, where every minor infraction is severely punished? Or, can we just get smokers to quit throwing their cigarette butts out of their car windows? Are we simply resigned to a society that is increasingly more “just about me”, where anyone can expect to be as obnoxious as they choose? Bottom line, there aren't enough police to enforce good manners or a minimal amount of consideration of others; it's up to each of us as individuals, to both lead by example and to demand it from others.

             
          • Christian_saller says:

            >>Are you referring to the hip hop generation/gangsta attitude prevelent among certain segments of society? Or, are you questioning the single-parent, welfare lifestyle that seems to be creating a generation that's never been taught what respect, of themselves and of others, entails?<<

            I am referring to neither of these. I meant the attitude of people who do not themselves live in cities, cannot conceive of ever doing so, and wonder why anyone else would do so by choice. Steeped in pulpy images of urban violence and chaos, they conclude that people who choose to live in cities do so because they somehow enjoy that atmosphere. This attitude is precisely indicative of the extent to which cities (and what they once were in our culture) have been discarded by a certain benighted segment of the country's population.

             
          • Diogenes says:

            Amen, Christian. I once talked to some friends about the drug house across the street from me. They replied sarcastically, “but that's city living, deal with it or move to O'Fallon.” No, it's NOT city life, and I'm sick of all these troublemakers acting out their worst idea of what a city should be. I find JZ71's comments ironic, since I think he lives in the suburbs and designs strip malls; nice lame attempt at playing devil's advocate. We city residents have the right to determine what behavior will occur in our city, and we will not tolerate places like Lure.

             
          • JZ71 says:

            Actually, I do live in the city (Lindenwood Park area), and the last strip mall I designed was in 2005. I do agree that residents have a right to define their neighborhoods, but also believe that both the right tools need to be used and that neighborhoods in transition / gentrifying present unique challenges when it comes to balancing new and existing uses.

            As for Lure, I see two separate issues, unauthorized use of common spaces within the building and idiot patrons outside. The unauthorized use is a civil issue, not much different than illegal parking on private lots – there are remedies outside the city bureacracy. As for idiot patrons, once they're outside, they a) may or may not be from Lure, and b) Lure has no legal control over or responsibility for them – that falls on the Police.

            Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways – either you allow music (or alcohol), of any and all kinds, or you allow no music (or alcohol). You can't pick and choose, either the format or the patrons – these are first ammendment and public accomodations issues. While we'd all probably be fine with middle-of-the-road, relatively mellow live entertainment, but the government can't, and shouldn't, be deciding what's PC and what's not.

             
    • Diogenes says:

      Washington Avenue hasn't been an entertainment district for decades; it was originally the center of the city's garment district, before it was largely abandoned. While the raves began moving in a while back, raves a neighborhood do not make. You're still bitter about the smoking ban passing, aren't you?

       
  2. Me says:

    I don't see this listed on the City Hall website. Also, from what someone told me, it will likely be postponed until later in Sept to be merged with another revocation hearing.

     
  3. JZ71 says:

    Not much different than buying a home under a runway flight path, next to a rail line, next to a freeway or next to a firehouse – it's gonna be noisier. Plus one's expectations of acceptable noise and behavior levels change as one ages – what's good or OK in your early 20's is different than your late 30's or your early 50's. The fundamental question is whether you or your neighborhood should be the one expected to change? It doesn't matter if it's the loft district, Soulard or Wrigleyville, but it'll be up to the residents in every neighborhood to figure out what that happy middle ground should be . . .

     
    • Adam says:

      people, based on what i've read it's not about noise. it's about multiple shooting incidents, general belligerent behavior, people breaking into and being snuck into private lobbies and stairwells, smoking where they shouldn't be, destroying private property, etc.

       
      • JZ71 says:

        Is this the clubs' fault or their patrons? These are apparently mostly young adults choosing to act like a-holes. The clubs pay their taxes. We pay our taxes. The Police have finite resources. Are we all willing to double our taxes to triple our police force? Or do we just need a law that locks every jerk up for 30 days, minimum?! The clubs can only do so much, outside their premises. They can eject unruly patrrons, but they can't magically make them act like little gentlemen and women once they're out that door. Both “society” and their peers seem willing to tolerate, or even encourage, a certain level / varying degrees of “coarse” and “uncouth” behavior. Until that changes (bring back caning? the stocks? nuns with rulers?), we're goiing to be stuck with this type of friction.

         
        • Adam says:

          Some residents have claimed that Lure employees are letting Lure patrons into parts of the building that do not belong to Lure. That is, indeed, Lure's fault. And up until now Lure's owners have been completely unreceptive to working with residents to address these (or any other) issues.

          “Are we all willing to double our taxes to triple our police force?”

          No, you just shut down the nuisance club.

          “Both 'society' and their peers seem willing to tolerate, or even encourage, a certain level / varying degrees of 'coarse' and 'uncouth' behavior.”

          Seems to me that shutting down a nuisance club says “we will not tolerate this behavior.”

           
          • JZ71 says:

            So is Lure a tenant with a lease or a resident that owns their space? Either way, it sounds like the real issue is a landlord or HOA issue. A bar apparently is, has been, and will continue to be a legal use for this space. If “Lure employees are letting Lure patrons into parts of the building that do not belong to Lure. . . . And up until now Lure's owners have been completely unreceptive to working with residents to address these (or any other) issues” then this is a civil issue between the affected parties, not something where the police powers of the city should come into play. If need be, have the police arrest the appropriate people for trespassing, but a nightclub, by its very nature, will be attracting loud, obnoxious people who like to smoke into the wee hours of the morning. If the residents don't like that, then moving to Cottleville or Arnold might be the best solution.

             
          • Diogenes says:

            A business is ultimately responsible for its patrons, or it must make them leave.

             
          • JZ71 says:

            And that is the bigger problem – rowdy patrons on Washington OUTSIDE the clubs (and their control).

             
          • Complainer says:

            SO by that same logic, if the neighbor in the apartment next to me continually leaves food out drawing roaches and they enter my apartment whose fault is it? If someone leaves rotting fish in their apartment and the smell wafts into my living space who do I complain to? If someone falls asleep with a lit cigarette starting the sprinklers and the water damages my belongings who pays? If every night there is a brawl right outside their establishment with gunfire and beatings, who's at fault? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out cause and effect. Why is it all the numerous other bars on Washington don't seem to have this issue?

             
          • JZ71 says:

            “If the neighbor in the apartment next to me continually leaves food out drawing roaches and they enter my apartment whose fault is it?” Your neighbor, obviously.

            “If someone leaves rotting fish in their apartment and the smell wafts into my living space who do I complain to?” Your landlord.

            “If someone falls asleep with a lit cigarette starting the sprinklers and the water damages my belongings who pays?” Your renters' insurance.

            “If every night there is a brawl right outside their establishment with gunfire and beatings, who's at fault?” The patrons and/or wannabe patrons who have been denied entrance.

            “It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out cause and effect. Why is it all the numerous other bars on Washington don't seem to have this issue?” Because they don't attract patrons that are social misfits? Because they don't share common facilities with residential tenants? Because their residential neighbors are less sensitive to / more forgiving of youthful indiscretions and late-night carousing?

            Where we seem to have a fundamental disagreement is the concept of personal responsibility. A bar can be too loud, too late, and/or can generate a range of obnoxious smells associated with the kitchen. But a bar, or any other venue, has only limited control over the actions of individual patrons. It doesn't matter if it's Lure, Riverport, the Jones Dome or any of our major universities, many events will attract a certain number of a-holes, and when you mix in alcohol, you have the makings for some truly obnoxious behavior. Do you shut down every venue that has ever had problems? Or do you raise the expectations of what are police department should be doing about individual, illegal behaviors?

             
          • Complainer says:

            I would agree on the personal responsibility part. What, however, would you do if your neighbors every week decided to have “firework Fridays” with brawls in the front lawn, fireworks going off at 2:30am, yelling and screaming all the time. Sure, you call the cops, but they don't do anything… what are you going to do? Move? What if you couldn't sell your house? What if when you moved in a little old lady lived in the neighbors house, and then the “new neighbors” moved in?

            So, in effect, the cops either can't or won't do anything.

            Many of them get paid by Lure btw “working” secondary…

            Then there are the liquor violations, so there's something wrong in Kraiberg's office… heck, his former employee just got nailed by the Feds for attempting to get kickbacks from another Trupiano restaurant.

            *shrug*, like many other “loft dwellers” I gave up and like so many others moved out of the city as we got tired of not being listened to. So we took our tax dollars with us to places where our significant incomes are appreciated. Every time a story like this comes up, it validates every single reason I moved out of that area as I sit back and count my blessings that I was able to get out of there.

             
          • JZ71 says:

            You've identified the real downside to mixed-use zoning – coexistence! One reason homogeneous suburbs appeal to so many people are that there are fewer “surprises” and conflicts – if your neighbors think and act just like you, then the chances for “being on a different page” are significantly reduced. Compare that to the attitudes of the patrons of hip-hop nights versus the typical loft dweller – there's little conversation, much less any common ground. Putting the two together pretty much guarantees friction . . .

             
  4. guest says:

    “I attended a meeting at Lure recently where members of the “

    I think this got cutoff on your post somehow.

     
  5. A Torch says:

    I was there for the first round of Washington Ave area clubs (almost two decades ago) most of those were only open Thurs-Saturday and almost no one lived there except for a few artists and shopkeepers. There WERE numerous clubs that got in trouble for violence outside the club (often started inside the club and bouncers threw them to the curb where it continued) but mostly liquor violations-serving minors etc. This is NOT new; clubs were frequently put on probation and some had their licenses revoked and the club was closed for 2 weeks, 4 weeks, etc. and re-opened or sometimes they never reopened…just the nature of the biz. I can honestly say we rarely had shootings though, I can think of only 1 in about a 5 year stretch in the 1990s. Maybe 'last call' should be bumped up earlier on weekdays.

     
  6. A Torch says:

    Diogenes stated: 'Washington Avenue hasn't been an entertainment district for decades'. – SAY WHAT? Where have you been and when is the last time you were down there on a nice summer weekend night? It still is an entertainment area but just a bit more gentrified. You can hit a gallery opening, a dance club, an Irish bar, a nice restaurant and boutique shops and then maybe the City Museum and start all over again. That is an entertainment district! This is a bright spot in our downtown area that was largely grown organically two blocks at a time, be proud of it and don' let ONE bad club send everyone into a panic.

     
    • Guest314 says:

      This is not at all true. While Washington has been thriving for a few years, it's only been an entertainment district for a couple decades at the most. It hasn't been an entertainment district for the decades you claim. I don't think the area was full of crowded nightlife in the 1960's – 1980's.

       
  7. A Torch says:

    Diogenes stated: ‘Washington Avenue hasn’t been an entertainment district for decades’. – SAY WHAT? Where have you been and when is the last time you were down there on a nice summer weekend night? It still is an entertainment area but just a bit more gentrified. You can hit a gallery opening, a dance club, an Irish bar, a nice restaurant and boutique shops and then maybe the City Museum and start all over again. That is an entertainment district! This is a bright spot in our downtown area that was largely grown organically two blocks at a time, be proud of it and don’ let ONE bad club send everyone into a panic.

     
  8. Dempsterholland says:

    I have an idea. Why not blame the actual people who caused the problems by shooting guns, making noise, etc. Then arrest them.

     
  9. Dempsterholland says:

    I grew up in the city during the l940s and 1960s, at McPherson and Euclid. There were at least two sleezy bars on the corner and, rumor had it, a brothel or two. Sometimes it was noisy/ We just accepted it as the way life was and went about our daily business. In later years,as crime got worse, people moved out. But throughout it was always an interesting neighborhood.

     

Comment on this Article:

Advertisement



FACEBOOK POSTS

Unable to display Facebook posts.
Show error

Error: (#10) This endpoint requires the 'manage_pages' permission or the 'Page Public Content Access' feature. Refer to https://developers.facebook.com/docs/apps/review/login-permissions#manage-pages and https://developers.facebook.com/docs/apps/review/feature#reference-PAGES_ACCESS for details.
Type: OAuthException
Code: 10
Please refer to our Error Message Reference.

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe