Home » Downtown »Featured »North City »Politics/Policy »South City » Currently Reading:

Readers Split on MSD Plan To Raze Vacant Buildings To Reduce Water Runoff

January 6, 2016 Downtown, Featured, North City, Politics/Policy, South City 1 Comment
Focus area, click image to view larger PDF
Focus area, click image to view larger PDF

In the recent non-scientific Sunday Poll readers were split on MSD’s plan to raze vacant buildings to reduce water runoff.

  • Support side 18
  • Oppose side 17
  • Neutral+Unsure 7

Below is the breakdown:

Q: To reduce water runoff, the Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) plans to raze vacant buildings. Oppose or support?

  • Strongly support 8 [19.05%]
  • Support 3 [7.14%]
  • Somewhat support 7 [16.67%]
  • Neither oppose or support 5 [11.9%]
  • Somewhat oppose 2 [4.76%]
  • Oppose 3 [7.14%]
  • Strongly oppose 12 [28.57%]
  • Unsure/No Answer 2 [4.76%]

As you can see, the “strongly oppose” answer got the biggest response. Supporters weren’t as enthusiastic. Much of the demolition would happen in neighborhoods struggling to remain relevant.

While it could take several years to spend down the money, even the longest spending scenario would amount to a near doubling of St. Louis’ demolition budget. And areas where MSD sees the most benefit in terms of runoff and watersheds also are the areas – primarily in north St. Louis – where the city’s vacant properties are concentrated. 

Those areas are part of the Bissell watershed, where the Environmental Protection Agency has told MSD to better manage stormwater. (Post-Dispatch)

Each time a building is razed it gets harder to convince remaining owners to invest in their properties, to get residents to stay. Still, I need to read more about MSD’s Project Clear.

— Steve Patterson


Currently there is "1 comment" on this Article:

  1. Mark-AL says:

    MSD has been told to deal with the problem. And they are. I commend them for moving forward–with something! While extensive demo does discourage nearby homeowners, so does vacant, derelict property. Maybe moreso. Eliminating impervious surfaces buys MSD some needed time, until an alternative is implemented (possibly tied to a legitimate, comprehensive north-side development plan) to responsibly handle the problem. Any subsurface modifications done today will likely be useless in any new development scenario.


Comment on this Article: