Additional Notes from Hearing on Energy Center

Yesterday’s meeting on the conditional use application for the Energy Center to be operated by the New Life Evangelistic Center was interesting to say the least.  To clarify, it was only about the zoning for the use of the former florist shop & greenhouse.

Larry Rice spoke on behalf of his plan for the property, calling for “healing” between the white and black communities in St. Louis.  He commented that at last week’s informational meeting there was not a black person in the room (true) — implying this is some sort of white bias I guess.  Interestingly, the first person to speak against the energy center was a black homeowner that lives across the street from the property in question.

Rice, at one point, indicated the property looked better than it did a year ago.  This is certainly true, I’ve known the place since 1994 and it has never looked better.   Rice said the neighbors loved the improvements they had made, that they had cut down high weeds and fixed broken greenhouse glass that was inherited from the previous owner.  But Rice only bought the property in July of this year — after improvements had been made and grass cut.  The previous owner, Susan Jansen, is one of his supporters and she was seated in the row behind him.  His remark confirmed my suspicion — Rice bought the property last November but in Jansen’s name rather than New Life Evangelistic Center.  He views the previous owner as the one Jansen purchased it from.

A Post-Dispatch story posted yesterday following the meeting with a headline “Residents mad about Rice’ center” included this near the end:

After the hearing, Rice said he was dismayed at his opponents’ anger that’s built up over the last month.

“I’m  sensing a hostility directed at homeless people I haven’t seen in 35 years,”  said  Rice.  “I  grieve over the bitterness and fear I’m seeing in south St. Louis.”

Today the online version drops the above.  The new headline is  “Rev. Rice gets hammered by Dutchtown residents at hearing.”  New in this version is:

The property includes a former flower shop with a greenhouse and the house next door. Rice bought them over the summer for $216,000.

Rice said if he doesn’t get the permits, he’ll appeal the city’s decision. He said if his appeal fails, “we’ll use it as transitional housing or low-income housing.”

Terrell Eiland, a zoning specialist with the St. Louis department of public safety who chaired the hearing, said that Rice would need another permit to operate the property as a residence for multiple people.

Again, just to clarify the property that was under consideration for a conditional use permit yesterday was only the storefront and greenhouse — not the old frame house and open land.  Ironically Rice has said numerous times that you can’t house people in a greenhouse — it is too hot.  Certainly a logical statement.  So would he invest additional money to raze the storefront and greenhouse to build some sort of group home?  Doubtful.

Following the meeting Ald. Kirner asked me how everyone did.  I agreed that everyone, including her, did a good job.  I thanked her for withdrawing her prior support.  Still, I don’t think even Larry Rice should be subjected to our changes with the wind form of approval/non-approval from our elected officials.  This is not to say that Kirner should support the project because she earlier expressed support.  But while claiming that she must listing to constituents now, why weren’t they consulted before?  Conditional use zoning for any business that brings in large quantities of people to a residential block is something that at least the owners on that block need to be consulted on before approval is given.

A question that remains for me is if the city will allow him to operate his “energy fair” that he has already scheduled for October 27th from 10am to 2pm?  This is probably a question for our new public safety director, Charles Bryson.  Maybe it should go on — it would make an interesting backdrop for a protest along the public sidewalk in front of his property.

Blogging From The Conditional Use Hearing On Energy Center

This post is regarding the conditional use hearing for Larry Rice’s Energy Center in the Dutchtown Neighborhood (see prior post). I’m blogging from the meeting as it is underway. Updates will be added below in reverse order (oldest at the bottom).

10:10am: People are still talking outside the hearing room, reporters were getting quotes. I’m signing off now for a couple more meetings — I’ll have more later today.

9:55am: Post meeting notes. The opposition was strong. We all signed a sheet that we were hear to speak against the conditional use so it could be submitted since we were not all able to speak. The conditional use was only on the storefront & greenhouse — not the full property.

9:40am: Testimony is concluded. A decision will be reached later with the answer being mailed out.

9:33am: Ald Kirner withdrew her prior support.

9:31am: Only five people have been allowed to speak. The city’s staff person indicated that no further testimony will be taken. Many took off work to come to the meeting but they will not be heard. Ald. Kirner gets the last word before Rice.

9:26am: Downtown Dutchtown president Caya Aufiero spoke in opposition. I’ll provide a copy of their well-worded later.

9:21am: One person spoke in favor the energy center. Opposition is now beginning testimony starting with a neighbor across the street.

9:19am: City staff person raises issue about Rice’s sign for the business which has already been posted. He asks Rice if he has applied for a sign permit. Rice indicates he has not applied for a sign permit.

9:15am: Larry Rice indicates he has traveled all over the country taking classes on alternative energy. Has taken “8 courses” at the Solar Energy Institute.

9:10am: Larry Rice is now presenting his case.

9:05am: Representatives of both the Mayor’s office and the President of the Board of Aldermen are among the audience.

8:50am: Hearing is underway with other items on the agenda. The room is not full but there are more people here in opposition than in favor. Alderman Kirner is sitting among those opposed. The process is one person from the city asking questions of the applicant, the proceedings are audio recorded. Following the applicant there is a chance for anyone else supporting the application to speak. Then opposition gets to have a say. The applicant and one person from the opposition can speak briefly to close. The interesting thing is the opposition is not a collective group but simply a bunch a individual home owners — not sure how one person will be selected. More as it develops.

Hearing on Zoning Request for Energy Center Thursday AM at City Hall

Those who support and oppose the conditional use zoning request of Larry Rice’s Energy Center in Dutchtown will have their say Thursday morning at City Hall (8:30am in Room 208). At issue is whether or not the city should grant Rice’s request for occupancy of the former Held Florist building which is in the middle of the 47xx block of Tennessee Ave, an otherwise residential street (see prior post).

Rice did a mass mailing in the area (presumably to property owners) to gather support (view PDF of letter).

The following is the most relevant paragraph from the letter:

Above, Rice admits to being ignorant about the basic concept of zoning and occupancy — something every purchaser of real estate should investigate. But are we really to believe that he made an innocent mistake given that he bought the property from a close friend and supporter? While I can offer no evidence it is my belief that Susan Jansen acted as a straw party to purchase and renovate the 1950s storefront and greenhouse. Once ready to open as the Energy Center, the deed was switched to the New Life Evangelistic Center. There is nothing illegal about this —- in fact it is done all the time by entities that wish to acquire property and not be noticed by using their name initially.

Rice probably figured that had he simply put an option on the property contingent to obtaining conditional use zoning for his operation that opposition would have been high and he would not prevail (a likely outcome in my estimation). So instead he gambled and figured it was better to make it look like an oversight — by not knowing the process. Indeed, many do not know. An innocent mistake?

Once again Rice is indeed using wrong words to describe the zoning. He indicates in his letter that “the zoning on it had changed to residential.” Wrong. I’ve been unable to find out prior zoning for the area but most likely it has been a residential zone for some time — at least a decade. The trick was that while the Held Florist was still in operation it was grandfathered in — allowed to continue as what is known as a nonconforming use. Rice continues, “there will be a hearing to change the zoning back to commercial.” Wrong again. The hearing is about a conditional-use permit to allow him to operate as a nonconforming use in a residentially zoned area — not permanently change the zoning.  In fact, the city cannot legally change the zoning on a single parcel to a classification different than anything around it — that is known as spot zoning.

The hearing is Thursday 10/18/2007 at 8:30am in Room 208 (aka The Kennedy Hearing Room).  If you wish to share your views with the NLEC on this issue you can call the number listed in the letter (314-421-3020).  Alternatively you can email Larry Rice at larrywrice@yahoo.com.

Homeless Mission Forced Out of Downtown Chicago Gets New ‘Green’ Digs by Famous Architect

Solar power, green roofs mix with dorm bunks for hundreds of homeless — a bold step toward more sustainable shelters for Chicago’s homeless. From Sunday’s Chicago Tribune:

Located at 1458 S. Canal St., the $27 million, privately funded mission is part of that move toward sustainability, as indicated by the rows of ungainly rooftop solar panels that resemble spiky hair. Its exterior is also adorned with three large signs, including a large white cross proclaiming “Jesus Saves,” which for decades advertised the mission’s former home for men at 646 S. State St. The new 152,000-square-foot building consolidates and expands the facilities in that run-down structure, which dates back to the time when Al Capone whizzed up and down South State Street, with those in a Pacific Garden building for women and children at 955 W. Grand Ave. Despite the presence of the familiar signs, the mission’s new surroundings may prove dislocating to the homeless people it serves. Its old home was within steps of transit lines as well as prospective employers. But the new site, to which city officials forced the mission to move to make way for the expansion of Jones College Prep High School alongside the old building on State, is a hefty walk from nearby transit stops. And those hikes will seem long indeed when the wind lashes the skin come December.

“It’s certainly less convenient, less centrally located,” said Ed Shurna, executive director of the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless. The city, he said, has for years been moving shelters out of downtown. The Pacific Garden Mission, Shurna added, was the last to go.

The article includes a video report on the facility — including talk of the large cafeteria, hair salon and other consolidated services near on Chicago’s near southside.

On Chicago’s near northside is a recently completed SRO designed by famed Architect Helmut Jahn, a 96-unit green building that includes wind turbines and a green roof. Last year a New York Times article indicate, “the units in the five-story building average about 300 square feet, and all are equipped with private baths and kitchenettes. Although finishes are basic, the overall feel is closer to a hip hotel than the numbing blandness one associates with subsidized housing.” At $18 million it should be nice — a cool million of that total was green features. Looking at the photos of the project it is indeed quite nice and the roof turbines are very interesting in their arrangement along the top of the roof.

St. Louis is already following the Chicago model by encouraging homeless services to locate on the fringes of downtown, rather than inside the core. I must admit, the lack of immediate transportation concerns me. Still, I’d like to the community come together and help fund a nice facility (or multiple facilities) that can provide the homeless in our society places to sleep peacefully and hopefully get the support they need (showers, laundry, etc…) so they can be fully (or at least more) self sustaining. I think we can find ways to co-mingle so long as well-intentioned suburbanites stop turning our public parks into mobile food pantries.

Former Public Defender Gets Year Probation and $2,000 Fine

Friday afternoon I did something I never thought I’d be doing, I sat in a federal courtroom watching a friend stand before a judge and receive a sentence as a felon.  You recall the case from May when two public defenders and one prosecutor suddenly resigned.  C, a public defender working under E.A., married E’s non-citizen boyfriend P.A. so he could remain in the U.S. as his student visa was about to expire.  C’s boyfriend T was a witness to the Las Vegas wedding.

The family and friends that packed the 14th floor courtroom at the Eagleton federal courthouse in downtown St. Louis were relieved when Judge Perry sentenced E.A. to probation.  Sentencing guidelines gave her the choice to sentence him between zero and six months in prison.  The judge was lenient, calling it “a sad case.”

Sad indeed.  E.A. loved his job as a public defender.  He could have made far more money as a private attorney but he enjoyed giving a voice to those unable to afford legal representation.  E’s law license is suspended and may well be revoked.  As a convicted felon, he will no longer be able to vote.  The saddest of all is the fact that two people whom I know love each other are now thousands of miles apart.

Following the sentencing I was able to meet E’s parents and his large family.  They and other friends gathered at his home for a celebration.  While I had met P’s mom before while she was visiting from Peru, I had never met E’s family.   Pretty typical family and everyone realized that although this was a happy moment it was still sad — P was part of their family too.

A straight person can sponsor a foreign person but indicating they are to be married in future as a way for the new person to get citizenship but a gay couple very much in love with each other are afforded no such equal protections.  Legislation before congress hopes to level the playing field so that others are not forced into bad situations in the hopes of remaining together.

UPDATE: 3/5/2010 – Names reduced to initials.