Planning Commissioners Journal Hits the Road

The national publication, the Planning Commissioners Journal, is hitting the road — literally. Editor Wayne Senville is taking a scenic drive across America via U.S. Route 50. The best part is, he is blogging daily about the trip. From the press release:

Do planners face the same issues in Maryland as they do in Colorado, in Ohio as in Kansas? That’s part of what Wayne Senville, editor of the national Planning Commissioners Journal will be finding out during a six-week cross-country trip along U.S. Route 50.

Between the Memorial Day weekend and July 10th, Senville will be meeting with planners and planning commissioners in more than two dozen communities in the 12 states (and the District of Columbia) that Route 50 crosses.

According to Senville: “In conversations I’ve had with planners in setting up this trip, I know I’ll be reporting on many critical issues facing cities and towns, from the revitalization of downtowns and urban riverfronts to dealing with the effects of explosive growth. I’ll also be covering a diverse range of concerns: tourism and its impacts; inner-city economics; neighborhood efforts to make it easier for residents to ‘age in place;’ how to promote citizen involvement in local planning; and much more.” And, adds Senville, “of course, I’ll also be talking with planners about the challenges they face in dealing with roads and highways.”

In less than two weeks Senville will be in St. Louis. One of those that Senville will be talking with is yours truly. Back to the press release:

One of most innovative aspects of this trip — indeed as far as we know the first time it’s being done to report on coast-to-coast planning issues — is that Senville will be posting daily online reports on what he’s hearing. Through a combination of text, photos, video, and audio clips, visitors to the Route 50 blog site: www.Rte50.com will be able to follow Senville as he works his way West. Visitors to the blog are encouraged to leave comments on any of the postings.

The Route 50 blog is already started with visits to a couple of towns in Maryland after leaving Burlington Vt. I think readers here will find it interesting, I know I certainly enjoy reading about planning issues facing cities, townships and counties. We are more alike than we are different.

I have an idea about things I want to communicate with Senville (both good & bad) but I want to hear what you think is important for the Planning Commissioners Journal to understand about St. Louis.

Political Eye on Ald. Florida

Last weeks ‘Political Eye’ editorial in the St. Louis American took aim at 15th ward Alderman Jennifer Florida. Florida, you may recall, is the alderman that I squared off against last year over her push for a relocated McDonald’s on South Grand. Thankfully, her relocation of the fast-food chain failed. Here is an excerpt from the editorial, she was rumored to want the job as Lewis Reed’s Chief of Staff:

Florida’ 15th Ward didn’t exactly deliver the bacon for Reed, though it did give him well over the typical 15 percent of the ward’s vote for an African American running citywide. During Reed’s campaign, Florida was considered by many to be overbearing, rude and grossly insensitive. While Florida reportedly got on everyone’s last nerve, even when she snapped at low-keyed and in control Alderwoman April Ford Griffin, her antics were dismissed and the campaigned moved forward. At one point in the final days of the heated campaign, Florida’ see-saw personality finally disqualified her from even getting the community outreach post, which was taken by Rory Roundtree.

You can read the full editorial here. Thanks to Steve Wilke-Shapiro’s 15thwardSTL blog for the heads up.

Taxis Still Blocking Pedestrian Sidewalk at St. Louis’ Convention Center

This past January I had a post about the taxi situation in front of America’s Center, St. Louis’ convention center. Two things were happening. The main issue was the St. Louis Taxi Commission (which covers St. Louis City & County) set up a taxi stand in the direct path of pedestrians walking along Washington Ave. The second thing, as a result taxis were exiting the stand via the pedestrian crossing at 8th Street.

Above is a good overall view looking east along Washington Avenue with the convention center entrance on the left and the convention hotel on the right, across the street. In the direct line of pedestrians walking along Washington are various planters, bollards, and a taxi. In the next block is access to a light rail station. Pedestrians are forced to either share the space with the taxis or walk in the driveway off to the left. Either way pedestrians are placed in the direct path of cars or buses. You’d think, in the interest of getting more activity downtown, we’d try to make the sidewalks as friendly as possible.

The image above showed the pedestrian crossing at 8th street. Taxis leaving their designated stand would make a quick left through the ramp/crossing area to get onto Washington, go down 8th or head over to the hotel. For video of this in action see my prior post.

As of yesterday two additional bollards had been placed to help prevent the taxis from leaving the stand through the pedestrian crossing. The other bollards shown were already in place back in January. While I am glad these were added it does not address the fact the sidewalk along one of our more important roads is being consumed by auto uses. This is all next to a wide road (4 lanes plus center).

What does this image say about the priorities of St. Louis’ leaders?

In January I suggested the taxi stand be moved to the outside lane of Washington Ave. Here is what I wrote:

Set up the taxi stand on Washington Ave between 7th and 8th, moving the existing bus stop to the West of 8th but still in front of the convention center. Also allow parking on the opposite side of Washington next to the Renaissance Grand Hotel. A few spaces could be short-term spaces (15-30 minutes) for those running into Starbucks or Kinkos). The rest would serve the general area. At the end of that block An American Place restaurant could have 60ft or so for valet. Back at 7th and Washington I’d set up a single short-term space immediately adjacet to the visitor’s center.

Traffic, in my view, just isn’t that heavy to justify all the open lanes. Sure, we’ve got that 15 minute period in the morning and afternoon where traffic backs up for a block — maybe a block and a half. This section of Washington prohibits parking 24/7 while just up the street between 10th and Tucker (aka 12th) parking is allowed except for 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm. We simply do not have massive two hour rush periods on Washington Ave.

The solution is this, allow parking on Washington Ave. with a couple of exceptions. On the westbound lane (north side of street) prohibit morning parking from say 7:30am to 8:30am. This keeps the two westbound lanes open in the AM when it is needed most. Conversely, allow parking on the eastbound lane (south side of street) prohibit afternoon parking from 4:30pm to 5:30pm. The same logic applies, afternoon traffic is predominently eastbound in the afternoon so keep the parking lane open for an hour. There is absolutely no logic in prohibiting parking in both directions both in the morning and afternoon.

We want those who work downtown but don’t live downtown to stick around after they leave the office. They should want to stay to walk around, have a drink, grab dinner and do some shopping. Instead of providing a pleasant place for this to happen we have Washington Ave configured as a thoroughfare to make vacating the city easy. Where the lead taxi is shown above should be a vendor cart selling hot dogs, soft drinks and bottled water (so long as the cart doesn’t block the sidewalk). This would leave a far better impression on visitors/workers than a couple of taxis sitting on the sidewalk.

St. Louis’ leaders need to wake up and realize they can give away millions in TIFs but if we don’t attend to the details of people where it matters most we will not have the type of downtown we seek.

Biondi Razes Public Housing Building for Open Space

Don’t get excited folks, this is old news. Actually, it is more than 15 years old.  I was doing some research on the St. Louis Housing Authority and came across an interesting story that given the recent news about expansion of the law school I thought I’d share.
From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch March 15, 1992:

On Thursday, the Cochran Tenant Management Corporation, which [Bertha] Gilkey heads, submitted to the St. Louis Housing Authority a plan to buy one of its buildings that St. Louis University had wanted. The plan does not list a purchase price. Gilkey says she wants to turn University House into a cultural center as part of an education and training program she wants to offer to dysfunctional families at Cochran. University House, at 215 North Spring Avenue, is about three miles from Cochran, a public housing complex just north of downtown. Other parts of the program would operate out of a privately owned apartment complex near Cochran that Gilkey is negotiating to buy. Sources who did not want to be identified believe that Gilkey could be using her right under federal law to buy University House as a bargaining chip with St. Louis University to get its help with her family program. The university could be instrumental in starting an alternative education program for children in public housing, Gilkey said.

At the time Gilkey was trying to purchase the then vacant Neighborhood Gardens apartment complex adjacent to Cochran Gardens, the “privately owned” complex mentioned above. Neighorhood Gardens, architecturally very interesting, was recently renovated. Given how that vacant complex was next to Cochran Gardens it made sense to work togther but I am not so sure her plans for the building on Spring at Laclede would have been logistically feasible. For now I will assume that it would work and that transportation would not be an issue.

From Jerry Berger’s Post-Dispatch column in June 1992, just months after the building dispute started with Gilkey competing with Biondi:

Biondi wants to extend the malls on the Frost Campus by closing off West Pine Boulevard between Vandeventer and Spring and closing off Spring Avenue between Lindell and Laclede. He also envisions an outdoor amphitheater and a significant monument consisting of a bell tower and fountain at the intersection of West Pine and Spring. Removing asphalt on Grand Boulevard to allow the construction of a sculpture park. The university is quietly seeking a 6- to 10-foot sculpture as the park’s anchor. (Are you listening, Laumeier Sculpture Park’s Beej Nierengarten-Smith?) Sources close to Biondi say he is hoping alumni and benefactors of the university will dig deep into their pockets to finance the projects.

Does that say “removing asphalt on Grand Boulevard” for a sculpture park? Yes, yes it does. I can’t even think about that one right now. The main point of the above quote is that Biondi wanted to close off both West Pine and Spring and without control of the University House at the coner of these two streets he’d be out of luck, most likely. Gilkey’s plan, if you recall, would require transporting some people back and forth from the Cochran complex. Closed streets would certainly make transporting individuals more complex.

With no agreement between Biondi and Gilkey, a lawsuit was filed to help SLU & Biondi. From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch October 1, 1992:

St. Louis and its housing authority filed suit Wednesday to block a tenant management group from getting a 13-story building the city wants to sell to St. Louis University. The suit seeks to force the Department of Housing and Urban Development to sell the vacant University House, 215 North Spring Avenue, to the university. The suit was filed in federal court. On Monday, HUD tentatively approved selling University House to the Cochran Tenant Management Corp., headed by Bertha Gilkey. That organization runs Cochran Gardens housing complex north of downtown.

Mayor Vincent C. Schoemehl Jr. accused HUD secretary Jack Kemp of making a ”political payoff” to Gilkey, whom Kemp frequently refers to as a model public housing manager. ”This is an irresponsible use of power on the part of Jack Kemp and his millions of minions,” Schoemehl said. The Rev. Lawrence J. Biondi, president of St. Louis University, said he was ”completely frustrated and outraged” by HUD’s decision to prefer Gilkey’s bid. ”We will be left with an abandoned and decaying building in the heart of our campus and our community outreach programs will not all be housed in one convenient location,” Biondi said. Joseph G. Schiff, an assistant HUD secretary in Washington, responded: ”If Vince Schoemehl would spend more time improving the St. Louis Housing Authority and less time on needless partisan bickering and ridiculous lawsuits, the taxpayers of America would be better served.” …St. Louis University has been trying to get the 19-year-old building since the Housing Authority closed it in 1987. Gilkey has proposed a cultural and education center for families in public housing. The building once housed elderly people.

So in October 1992 SLU President Biondi wants to ensure their community outreach programs will all be in one location. The next day the Post-Dispatch reported that, “The university wants the building for offices and community programs.”  Well, that sounds good but in reality Biondi likely figured that if Gilkey got her cultural and education center it would mess up his plans.

Gee, was anything else going on in October 1992? Say, a presidential re-election campaign for Bush Sr. against some Governor of Arkansas? Could Kemp have been trying to help Bush get the black vote in St. Louis by siding with Gilkey? As we all know, Clinton made Bush a one-term President which meant Jack Kemp was out as HUD Secretary.
Besides the Presidential election of 1992 the mayor would elect its first African-American Mayor, Freeman Bosley, Jr., in March 1993. Geez, a new HUD Secretary under Clinton and a new mayor, would this help Gilkey? Nope! From the July 21, 1993 Post-Dispatch:

Bertha Gilkey, who failed in her bid to buy the 13-story, vacant University House, said Tuesday that she would sue the St. Louis Housing Authority and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in federal court to reverse the transfer of the building to the university.

Well, we could see that coming. I’m not sure if she sued or not but SLU got the building.  Back to the July 21, 1993 article:

The building, with 201 apartments that had been for elderly public housing residents, is on the west side of Spring Avenue just south of Lindell Boulevard. The university is turning that block, the block to the south of it and Pine Street between Spring and Vandeventer Avenue into a pedestrian mall. Victor De La Cruz, executive director of the St. Louis Housing Authority, said Tuesday that the agency had complied with federal procedures in the matter. “Our position does not change,” he said. The transfer was completed Friday, said the Rev. Lawrence Biondi, university president. He said he did not expect Gilkey’s plans to delay the mall’s completion. He said the university would raze the dilapidated building in four to six weeks.

What!?! Raze the building? Back in October SLU President Fr. Biondi wanted to ensure all their community outreach programs would be in a single convenient location! I guess Biondi conveniently found another location for the programs once the University House building was transferred to him — I mean to SLU.

The July 21, 1993 article continues on Biondi’s plans:

The university started working on the mall in May, closing Spring Avenue between Laclede Avenue and Lindell. The area will be transformed into a “contemplative park” that will include a lighted walking space, a 50-foot clock tower, a 10-tier amphitheater with waterfall, a fountain and sculptures. Biondi said that eventually, the university would complete its plan to define the school’s boundaries by closing West Pine Boulevard at Vandeventer Avenue.

A “contemplative park?”  Oh please, with all those ‘neked’ bronze statues around campus who can contemplate anything the Jesuits would approve.  Biondi got his street closings, clock tower, waterfall & fountain in addition to the sculptures.   I was not and am not a fan of the street closings but I get the “campus” logic.  What I don’t get is the razing of a building only 20 years old, most likely with a fine structure.
The Post-Dispatch has an editorial supporting SLU in the August 2, 19993 edition:

The St. Louis Housing Authority has given St. Louis University control of University House, a vacant public housing building on Spring Avenue near Lindell Boulevard. The university intends to demolish the structure and turn the block into a pedestrian mall. It might seem unconscionable to raze the building when this community has a waiting list of people needing decent housing. But the transfer can be justified in that it offers long-term benefits to public housing tenants.

As part of the transfer, the university promises to set up an $840,000 endowment for scholarships to be awarded over the next century to students who live in public housing. It also promises to help public housing managers develop and expand their business skills, and it will encourage public housing residents to make use of counseling and education clinics offered by the university. Though this transfer holds promise, it shouldn’t be regarded as a precedent.

There certainly should be concern over the fact that public housing is being demolished without being replaced.  Ordinarily, the federal government would require the construction of an equal number of public housing units to replace the 201 that will be lost when the 13-story University House is demolished. However, the federal government made an exception in this case. 

I intend to find out the current status of these scholorships and the rest of SLU’s promises.

The 201 units of public housing lost when the building was razed in 1993 is a bit dramatic, they were really lost six years earlier in 1987 when the St. Louis Housing Authority shuttered the building.  But that takes me back to one sentence from the Post-Dispatch from October 1, 1992; “St. Louis University has been trying to get the 19-year-old building since the Housing Authority closed it in 1987.”  What are the chances that Biondi helped make sure the housing authority, with members appointed by Mayor Schoemehl, decide the fate of the then 14-year old building housing elderly residents?  I think closing the University House was part of a long-term plan for Biondi.  When did he become President?  Oh yes, 1987 — the same year the Housing Authority closed the University House public housing building.  Schoemehl is now the head of Grand Center, Inc. which works closely with Fr. Biondi.

Returning to 2007 we have the current issue of SLU razing an old mansion for the law school expansion (see my post).  Architect Paul Hohmann has done some more research this latest issue, for his report see Vanishing STL.

KWMU Reports on Land Assembly Tax Credit and the ‘Blairmont’ Scheme

Most of you have heard the deal by now, a huge tax credit for developers doing projects of 75 acres or more in North St. Louis.  That is the plan passed by the Missouri legislature and awaiting Governor Blunt’s signature.  But 75 acres is just massive.  For comparison sake, the old Pruitt-Igoe housing site was only 57 acres (source). From KWMU:

Missouri’s historic tax credit program has done wonders for the city of St. Louis. It allowed big developers to turn old downtown warehouses into lofts. It’s also helped individual rehabbers fix up houses that have seen better days.

But a new tax credit plan that Missouri lawmakers sent to Governor Matt Blunt this spring gives developers major incentives to buy up large tracts of city land.

Someone is already doing that on the near north side, and many people there are worried about the future of their homes.

Click here for the story and link to the MP3 audio report from KWMU’s Matt Sepic.  Sepic indicates that he had scheduled to interview developer Paul McKee but that McKee canceled.  Nice huh?

I’m personally not opposed to a tax break for developers on some larger projects.  I have issues with the minimum size.  Yes, a single home lot at a time will take longer than we have to revitalize the north side.  But 75 acres at a minimum?  St. Louis is blessed with a very nice street grid of very reasonable sized blocks.  Why not have the minimum be more along the lines of 4-6 city blocks, still a decent sized project.  Why is it we must always go for the gigantic silver bullet solution in this town?

Jane Jacobs calls this “cataclysmic money.”  From Chapter 16 of the Death and Life of Great American Cities:

Money has its limitations.  It cannot buy inherent success for cities where the conditions for inherent success are lacking and where the use of the money fails to supply them.  Furthermore, money can only do ultimate harm where it destroys the conditions needed for inherent success.  On the other hand, by helping to supply the requirements needed, money can help build inherent success in cities.  Indeed, it is indispensible.

So far the state has not required anything that will ensure these 75+ acre projects have any qualities for success.  The city, with its 1947 suburban zoning code, will almost ensure failure without massive variances.  Developer McKee and Mayor Slay are remaining quite on their intentions and unfortunately will likely try to avoid public or professional input into the overall plan.  My fear is the end result will be a huge “investment” but a long-term failure.  At this point I have no edvidence to suggest otherwise.