Sunday Poll: Should The St. Louis Cardinals Become Missouri’s Official Baseball Team?

Each year legislators in Jefferson City introduce many bills. One recent bill recently received national attention:

A bill in the Missouri House of Representatives would make the St. Louis Cardinals the state’s official baseball team. (KMOV)

House Bill 2831 was introduced by State Rep Courtney Allen Curtis (D-73). This district is in North St. Louis County. Missouri has two Major League Baseball (MLB) team: the Kansas City Royals and St. Louis Cardinals.

Here’s today’s poll:

The poll will be open until 8pm.  Wednesday I’ll discuss the results and my thoughts.

— Steve Patterson

The Chemical Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) Is Everywhere In St. Louis!

We’ve all heard about the horrible problem of lead poisoning in Flint, Michigan, but silence on the problem here in St. Louis: Dihydrogen Monoxide

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the highly reactive hydroxyl radical, a species shown to mutate DNA, denature proteins, disrupt cell membranes, and chemically alter critical neurotransmitters. The atomic components of DHMO are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol. (DHMO.org)

Despite the dangers, it is everywhere in our society. Where is the media on this? Silenced! At least with natural gas they add an odor so people can be aware of the danger it poses!

Turn on your tap and I guarantee you’re going to get DHMO — the same chemical Monsanto uses in many of its products. Independent test results have confirmed the presence of DHMO in taps in the St. Louis region.

Officials claim it is safe to drink — but they said that in Flint too!  Do you really want to take that chance?

Thankfully there are grassroots efforts to raise awareness and ban this harmful chemical:

The National Consumer Coalition Against DHMO (NCCADHMO), not affiliated with the Coalition to Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide, was founded in 1997 in an effort to raise public awareness about the dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) in our daily lives. The secondary goal of NCCADHMO is to act in the public interest as a lobbying agent in Congress to affect public policy regarding the safety and uses of DHMO. Although we are not funded by the EPA, we are loosely affiliated with the US Environmental Assessment Center’s Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division. This affiliation was created in an effort to make information available to the public in an expedient fashion, and to provide a public forum for the ongoing DHMO debate. 

But DHMO has found its way into everything: food, beverages — even our own bodies! Yes, the chemical sprays on commercial crops & golf courses is in the food we eat daily.

— Steve Patterson

Green Street Development Updating Building At Jefferson Ave & Market St

In 2014 Green Street Development bought a vacant building at Jefferson Ave & Market Street, originally built by AG Edwards, now Wells Fargo Financial. Last year they signed web developer Avatara as the main tenant, click here to see their webpage on the project. Construction on a new entry is now underway.

I never liked the corner tower, so I’m glad it is gone. Looking forward to seeing the final results.

— Steve Patterson

$4.1 Million Dollar Judgement Against Owner of Condemned Parking Garage

In July 2014 the parking garage at Tucker & Locust closed for repairs. It seemed routine at the time.

It turns out the damage to the post-tensioned structure was more extensive than originally known. Since my original July 2014 tweet, I’ve posted quite a bit about it:

• December 2014: Parking Garage Undergoing Time-Consuming Multi-Million Dollar Restoration; Businesses Closed, Jobs Lost
• April 2015: Parking Garage Repairs Halted, Emergency Structural Condemnation Issued
• July 2015: Car Hit Planters & Scaffolding Outside Condemned Parking Garage
• July 2015: Readers: New Building Should Replace Condemned Parking Garage
• January 2016: Court Documents Shed Some Light On Condemned Parking Garage

Central Parking System, who operated the garage, sued the owners — two LLCs that begin with Tucker Parking.  Tucker Parking countersued.

On March 22nd Judge Dowd ruled:

JUDGMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW SET FORTH IN THE COURT’S ORDERS OF OCTOBER 13, 2015 AND JANUARY 21, 2016, WHICH THE COURT EXPRESSLY INCORPORATES HEREIN, THE COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT AS FOLLOWS:

1. BY AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES, THE COURT DISMISSES PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC’S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENT (COUNT I) AND BREACH OF LEASE (COUNT II) WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

So Central lost on their first two counts against Tucker. Let’s continue…

2. ON PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC’S CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC FOR UNJUST ENRICHMENT (COUNT III), THE COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC AND AGAINST DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF FOUR MILLION ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY-FOUR DOLLARS AND SEVENTY-SIX CENTS ($4,161,424.76).

Ouch. What is “unjust enrichment” anyway? The Wax Legal Dictionary defines it as:

The retention of a benefit conferred by another, that is not intended as a gift and is not legally justifiable, without offering compensation, in circumstances where compensation is reasonably expected. 

The elements of a cause of action for unjust enrichment are:  the enrichment of the party accused of unjust enrichment; that such enrichment was at the expense of the party seeking restitution; and the circumstances were such that in equity and good conscience restitution should be made.  An additional requirement is that the party accused of unjust enrichment must know of the benefit conferred; to ensure that the benefit was not foisted on the recipient and is something for which compensation is reasonably expected.

Recovery on a theory of unjust enrichment typically occurs where there was no contract between the parties, or a contract turns out to be invalid.

The specifics of this principal aren’t clear to me from the ruling.

3. ON DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC’S COUNTERCLAIM AGAINST PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC FOR BREACH OF LEASE (COUNT I), THE COURT FINDS IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC IN PART AND IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC IN PART. SPECIFICALLY, TO THE EXTENT DEFENDANTS BASE THEIR BREACH OF LEASE CLAIM ON CENTRAL PARKING’S ALLEGED OBLIGATION TO REPAIR THE GARAGE’S POST-TENSIONING SYSTEM BEFORE THE END OF THE LEASE TERM, THE COURT FINDS IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI LLC. TO THE EXTENT DEFENDANTS BASED THEIR BREACH OF LEASE CLAIM ON CENTRAL PARKING’S ALLEGED OBLIGATION TO REPAIR DETERIORATION OR DELAMINATION TO THE GARAGE’S CONCRETE SURFACE BEFORE THE END OF THE LEASE TERM, THE COURT FINDS IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC. HOWEVER, THE COURT FINDS THAT TUCKER CANNOT PROVE ANY DAMAGES FOR THIS BREACH BECAUSE, AS SET FORTH IN THE COURT’S ORDER OF OCTOBER 13, 2015, THE GARAGE IS AT THE END OF ITS USEFUL LIFE, THE GARAGE’S POST-TENSIONING SYSTEM IS BEYOND REPAIR, AND THE FAILURE OF THE POST-TENSIONING SYSTEM WAS DUE TO NORMAL OR ORDINARY “WEAR AND TEAR.” AS A RESULT, THE COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC AND AGAINST DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC.

Above we can get the message — the garage can’t be repaired.

4. ON DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC’S COUNTERCLAIMS AGAINST PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC FOR WASTE (COUNT III), NEGLIGENCE (COUNT IV), AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENT (COUNT V), THE COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF CENTRAL PARKING SYSTEM OF MISSOURI, LLC.

5. BY AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES, THE COURT DISMISSES DEFNDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES, LLC’S COUNTERCLAIM AGAINST CENTRAL PARKING CORPORATION FOR SUIT ON GUARANTY (COUNTII), WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

6. COSTS ARE ASSESSED AGAINST DEFENDANTS TUCKER PARKING HOLDINGS, LLC AND TUCKER PARKINGS EQUITIES, LLC PURSUANT TO RULE 77.01. SO ORDERED: 32929-JUDGE DAVID L. DOWD

So who owns this garage, who is behind these two Tucker Parking LLCs?

Both were created in Missouri on April 19, 2007, indicating a home state in Delaware. TUCKER PARKING EQUITIES LLC was formed in Delaware two days earlier. City records indicate tax bills are mailed to 24 Church Street, Montclair NJ.

The legal battle may continue for a while. Still, we can accept some facts:

• The existing garage is unusable, it’ll need to be razed eventually.
• The owner isn’t in St. Louis.
• The owner of the adjacent former Post-Dispatch building would like to have parking for tenant use.
• Many downtown residents, myself included, don’t want any surface parking or even more obvious parking garages.

I contacted 7th Ward Alderman Jack Coatar via email, who said:

It is my understanding that this garage has reached the end of its lifespan and that it would be extremely expensive to shore up this garage and make it safe to use. I would like to see the garage demolished and replaced with another parking structure that includes a first floor retail component.

I would like the development committee of the Downtown Neighborhood Association’s Planning and Zoning Committee to take an active role in the planning for any future use of this site.

If a new garage is built, I’d like it to be enclosed with an exhaust system rather than being open.

— Steve Patterson

A Detailed Look at the Streets of St. Charles

Last month I posted about the Streets of St. Charles after driving through it, see Indulge In Urban Living’ At Streets of St. Charles. In that post I wrote:

To most residents of St. Charles County this is more urbanity than they ever thought they’d see on their side of the Missouri River.

A decade or more ago this site would’ve been developed as a big box with an even bigger parking lot. Smaller buildings would’ve dotted the perimeter. Visitors would’ve been expected to arrive via car and to drive to reach other buildings on the site.  From my brief observations, it appears the planners have made sure pedestrians can reach every building via a sidewalk.

While I’m not going to give up my downtown loft to live here, it’s an improvement over old-school development patterns.

I didn’t feel I could be too harsh based on just driving through. So, later in February, I returned in my power wheelchair so I could spend more time there —  to see how well it works…or doesn’t. Within the project boundaries it works fairly well, they’ve made a much better effort than most developments to make sure each business is accessible as a pedestrian. Attempting to reach adjacent & nearby developments proved difficult, though the blame for that isn’t necessarily the fault of this developer.

I arrived at just before 10am — in need of a bathroom. I knew the adjacent Quik Trip would be a good choice.  Just how to get to it.

The internal site issues are pretty easy to correct, including a direct connection toward QT. Other problems, beyond the site, are more complex. St. Charles City, St. Charles County, MoDOT, etc all need to play a role in better connecting this site to its surroundings.

— Steve Patterson