St. Louis’ Neighborhood Boundaries Need to Be Examined

For those of you that don’t take well to change, I suggest you have a seat or maybe don’t even read this post. Why? I’ve got a real shocker for you: the boundaries for the city’s 79 neighborhoods need to be reexamined and, in many cases, be completely changed.

For centuries villages, towns and cities had their commercial districts as the heart of an area with residents walking to the center for goods, services and social interaction. This built strong neighborhoods. Following WWII, however, things changed with the car. We started seeing strip shopping centers and malls and the perception that it was best to separate uses — keeping single family houses away from multi-family housing and away from retail which was separate from office and industrial uses. The idea was we’d have all these separate uses and we’d easily whisk back and forth from one to the other in our individual cars. Time has taught us this vision didn’t turn out as imagined and it is really not the way to build strong communal ties. Having learned a hard lesson, we are back to mixing uses within a neighborhood.

During the Schoemehl administration the city was carved up into 79 entities and labeled as neighborhoods. I believe these neighborhood boundaries follow the old line of thinking — commercial districts belong at the edge rather than the center. But if we look back at history and how St. Louis developed we can reason that commercial streets, of which we have many, were the centerpiece of the neighborhood.

By placing our commercial district streets at the edges of neighborhoods rather than as their traditional center I believe that we’ve prevented these commercial districts from rebounding as they should. First, we need to look at Euclid in the West End. As always, it has served the surrounding area and is not a border between two neighborhoods with different leadership and interests. To contrast this we can look at MLK on the north side and Cherokee & Chippewa on the south side. All three streets, once quite vibrant and the center of commercial life in their respective areas, now act as edges. rather than unifying centers.

Cherokee (West of Jefferson) has Benton Park West on the north side of the street and Gravois Park on the South side of the street. A commercial district association adds yet another layer to the bureaucracy. The divisions for the various neighborhoods, created 25 years ago or so, was likely arbitrary or possibly political. Dividing Cherokee among two separate neighborhoods has not served the formerly thriving commercial district well. On a related note, Chippewa to the South is a dividing line between Gravois Park and Dutchtown. Again, this was a thriving commercial street at the center of its neighborhood. If I had to draw a line it would be down Miami street — halfway between Cherokee and Chippewa. North of Miami you’d be part of the neighborhood that contained the Cherokee commercial district and South of Miami you’d be part of the neighborhood containing the Chippewa commercial district. These neighborhoods could then focus their attention on building their neighborhoods around a strong commercial center, rather than ignoring the decaying street at the edge while assuming the neighborhood group on the other side will take care of things.

Along MLK on the north side we have a similar situation, magnified by the length of the street and the amount of physical decay. On the North side of MLK we have 8 mapped neighborhoods with another 9 on the South side of the street. In the 8 miles or so of this street only a few blocks are within a single neighborhood on both sides of the street (JeffVanderLou, east of Compton). Everywhere else MLK is seen as an edge and not as the formerly strong commercial center that it once was. Not that we want an 8-mile long neighborhood along MLK but you get the idea — the street needs to return as the centerpiece for commerce and jobs in the area and doing so is a challenge when it is used as a dividing line.

I believe we need to look at the center from the perspective of commercial districts and reposition neighborhood boundaries such that each neighborhood once again has a commercial heart. Yes, there will be instances where this is not possible or feasible but I believe it to be a worthwhile exercise to determine if we can achieve better outcomes along these commercial streets. It would also follow that major intersections, such as Cherokee and Jefferson or MLK and Goodfellow would be centers. The dividing lines should be at minor streets or along alleys. Let two neighborhood groups fight over the cleanup of an alley or problem properties on a minor road, not over the rebuilding and rejuvenation of a major commercial street.

Countless other examples of this division exist. South Grand comes to mind as does Delmar and Natural Bridge. On the positive side we do have examples of situations where the commercial district is already within a single neighborhood — such as Ivanhoe, Meramec & Virginia, parts of North Grand and 14th Street. Interstate highways, on the other hand, serve as solid edges that cannot be ignored.

I don’t know that we have the political will to change boundaries, no matter how logical it may be to do so. What I think we need is 5-6 planning districts, each comprising several neighborhoods. A planning district would work with a staff member of the Planning and Urban Design Agency to help with the bigger picture of visioning for their part of the city. This would hopefully move beyond ward or neighborhood boundaries and create some strong areas within the city, focusing on commercial streets as the centerpieces. It is time we examine how we look at our neighborhoods and see if changing some boundaries would potentially produce better results.

 

New Campaign Finance Law to Change Local Elections?

September 26, 2006 Politics/Policy 2 Comments

A new campaign finance law will take affect next year on January 1, having implications on fundraising for local races. Currently the limits per contributor are $325 for an aldermanic race and $1,275 for a city-wide race such as the President of the Board of Aldermen. Say you have a couple wanting to give big to an aldermanic candidate. Each of the couple can give $325 and if they have a business set up that business can also give $325. That gets us up to $975 for each election cycle. The primary and general election are each a cycle so a donor could max out at $1,950 (two persons + one business). The more businesses they have set up the more than can give. If they want to give more they donate to the party committee which can then give the money to the same candidate.

Come January 1, 2007 that all changes. The limits are gone. This same couple with a company can write a $1,000, $10,000 or $100,000 check to an aldermanic candidate if they like — they don’t even have to split it up to make it appear as if it came from various sources. Of course, this must all get reported. Some donors will still want to give to a party committee which can then distribute money to a candidate. Interestingly, the candidate can control the party committee. So Mr. Jones wants to give $5,000 to Ald. Smith but really doesn’t want to be that blatant can give a few checks over time to the ward party committee totaling $5,000. If the Ald. controls the committee, such as having their spouse be one of the committee people, they can then elect to have the party committee donate $5,000 to the candidate’s committee. To look up who is funding such a campaign we’d need to look at more places to source the money. The party committee can also support a candidate by printing signs or other things on their behalf although I this must be reported by the candidate committee as an “in-kind” contribution. Candidates cannot have direct control over a PAC that contributes to their campaign but these PACs can be run by friends, another way to funnel unlimited funds into campaigns.

So how will this impact local races next year? Post-Dispatch reporter Jake Wagman, blogging about a possible run by Ald. Lewis Reed for the President of the Board of Alderman, thinks it would take only “a few hefty checks to become a serious candidate” under the new law. True enough. Would Mayor Slay or Mike McMillan funnel some of their campaign cash Reed’s way? One thing is certain, we will see some bigger numbers on campaign reports this coming Spring.

For a good background on campaign limits in Missouri read, “Show me the money, but at what price?” Also, St. Louis Oracle did an outstanding analysis of the new law back in May of this year.

For those planning a run in the March primary or April general elections now is the time to begin your fundraising. Watch the limits before the new year but then go for it. I hope we will see some of the big money in this region looking to finance change, not more of the same. And by change I don’t mean corporations buying candidates to create legislation to favor their own special interests. We will know in April how this worked out.

 

The Preservation Board a Public Hearing or Not?

The new Chair of the St. Louis Preservation Board, Richard Callow, insists the meetings of the Preservation Board are not public hearings — that public input is taken but not required by ordinance. Callow has previously suggested I look at the enabling code, Chapter 24.08. In reading through that section I found this:

D. Subject to the written approval of the Planning Commission, the Preservation Board shall make and adopt, and may from time to time amend, rules and bylaws governing the conduct of its business and providing for the administration of this title.

This begs the question, what are the rules and bylaws that have been approved by the Planning Commission for the conduct of the Preservation Board? The city’s Cultural Resources office website certainly doesn’t list any rules, bylaws or anything else to help the public understand the process of going before the Preservation Board.

In another section of the city code, under demolition review, the law does make reference to a hearing:

The Cultural Resources Office shall immediately refer any application which is the subject of such an appeal, and the Cultural Resources Office’s entire file thereon, to the Preservation Board for hearing and resolution, based on the criteria set out in Sections 24.40.010 to 24.40.050.

Why is this important? Decisions of the Preservation Board impact the entire city but they don’t seem to have any public notice requirements — today’s meeting agenda was just posted today. Furthermore, anyone from the public wishing to speak on an item must arrive prior to 4pm and sign the sheet for that item. This, I believe, places an undue burden on the public and discourages them from becoming more involved in their community.

With the Preservation Board weighing decisions on demolitions, new construction and other concerns in Historic Districts and Preservation Review Districts you’d think there would be some form of advance notice — at least 10 calendar days prior to the hearing. The Cultural Resources Office does produce highly detailed PDF reports on each topic but at the very least they could list the property address in question, what is being decided (demo, new windows, etc…) and what neighborhood it falls under. Having at least this would alert the public in those neighborhoods that something is coming up they may wish to speak on.

Often during the Preservation Board you’ll hear one of the members ask the staff if they’ve heard from the neighborhood group. The answer is almost always no (Lafayette Square excepted). I wonder why? Perhaps because neighbors don’t have a clue a decision is being made about properties near them!

Michael Allen over at Ecology of Absence wrote about this subject last Friday.

Today’s meeting starts at 4pm. The agenda includes 7 items and encompassing hundreds of pages. Better start reading….

 

Trying to Learn About Ward Organizations in the City of St. Louis

September 25, 2006 Politics/Policy 11 Comments

A post on the 15th Ward blog of my friend Steve Wilke-Shapiro got my attention. It was a guest piece written by Jan Clinite, President of the 15th Ward Democrats. Basically this group was started in 2001 when Jennifer Florida didn’t or wasn’t going to get the endorsement of the other 15th Ward group — a “closed” organization whereby the members don’t vote. In closed wards, only the Committeeman and Committeewoman determine the endorsements.

The committee people are elected every four years in the August Democratic Presidential primary. Seldom are these posts challenged. Some, myself included, have questioned the need for such positions as well as the organizations themselves. The mission of these are typically to do the ‘get out the vote’ and to educate voters. My experience, albeit limited, has been that of a small social group. In the 25th Ward in 2005 the committee only had something like 20 paid members, if even that.
… Continue Reading

 

TGE Police Substation Still Not Open

September 24, 2006 Politics/Policy, South City 3 Comments

In April of this year I linked to a KSDK news story about a new police substation in the Tower Grove East neighborhood that was to open soon. The part I talked about was the $14K in Vespa scooters for officers to help them maneuver around the neighborhood, getting places quickly and quietly. From the KSDK report:

Alderman Reed hopes the substation and the scooters will be a crime deterrent in an area that’s known past problems, “It will send a signal to the bad guys that we’re open for business. We’re open to stopping all the bad activity.”

The alderman worked hard to make this happen and purchased the scooters with Ward 6 funds. They cost about $14,000. The bikes can travel more than 100 miles per hour and maneuver between buildings.

Five months later the substation is still not open, it seems the lease details have not yet been worked out with the building owner. Residents, once excited about the substation, are now frustrated at the bureaucracy for taking so long and pointing fingers at other departments. What kind of signal does this send to home owners in the area?

The scooters exist. Well, at least one does. I saw it on the morning after the arson fires in Lafayette Square, also in the 6th ward. Alderman Lewis Reed is considering a run for President of the Board of Alderman in March. Regardless, the 6th Ward seat is up for election at the same time.

 

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe