Tower Grove South Concerned Citizens Special Business District

What a name!  Ald Jennifer Florida is introducing legislation (BB89) at the Board Of Aldermen this morning to put the establishment of a special taxing district on the ballot for residents within the district to vote on.  The district, if approved, would be from the alley South of Utah Place, to the centerline of Grand, to the centerline of Gravois to Roger Place (one block West of Gustine). The official name would be the “Tower Grove South Concerned Citizens Special Business District.”
First, what is with the “concerned citizens” bit in the name?  They’ll never get the full name on banners or on trash cans.  Doesn’t every area have concerned citizens?
Secondly, I never like it when major streets are used as edges for neighborhood or business district lines — Grand was once the center point for residential areas on both sides.  When using major streets as dividing lines we end up with different groups having a say on the same street — but only for their half.  When business districts are done this way you end up with money for improvements for half the street.  Using alley lines is the better way to go.

And lastly I always wonder who manages the money — in this case it would be a 7-member Board of Commissioners appointed by the mayor.  Five would be property owners and two would be renters.

Time to Think About Running for Office

In less than a year the City of St Louis will have elections for half the Board of Aldermen — the 14 odd numbered seats. If you’d like to see some change in how the city is managed now is the perfect time to begin planning your campaign. I ran for the 25th back in 2005 and it was a very rewarding experience.

At this point you must already live in the ward in which you’d run in. Not sure what ward you live in? Then you probably shouldn’t run for office.

Those seats up for grabs next year are (existing Alderman):

• 1st Ward (gas allowance Troupe)
• 3rd Ward (raze the whole ward Bosley)
• 5th Ward (use zoning as leverage Ford-Griffin)
• 7th Ward (suburbanize the city Young)
• 9th Ward (Patterson just stirs the pot Ortmann)
• 11th Ward (Isn’t Loughborough Commons just great Villa)
• 13th Ward (Thank God Patterson is no longer my constituent Wessels)
• 15th Ward (Thank God Patterson didn’t move to the 15th ward Florida)
• 17th Ward (lease Forest Park Roddy)
• 19th Ward (I’m on the Preservation Board but I’ll vote to raze it Kennedy Davis)
• 21st Ward (a bit of suburbia named for me Jones King)
• 23rd Ward (the mayor is moving out of the ward Hanrahan)
• 25th Ward (Thank God Patterson moved Kirner)
• 27th Ward (Carter)

Alderman Wants Gasoline Allowance

Jake Wagman of the Post-Dispatch has reported on a new bill introduced at the Board of Aldermen today:

Even at City Hall, high gas prices have drivers concerned.

That’s why Alderman Charles Q. Troupe has a relief plan — for aldermen, at least.

Troupe plans on introducing a bill at tomorrow’s meeting that would give alderman an “expense account” for their fuel costs.

While “riding the ward” is a staple of aldermanic duty — right up there with returning phone calls and sending birthday wishes — it seems unlikely that Troupe’s colleagues would endorse his plan to charge taxpayers for their gas.

In looking at Board Bill 83 we see how much Troupe is seeking:

Each alderman shall receive a monthly sum equal to four hundred (400) miles multiplied by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) standard mileage rate for business miles driven.

The 2008 IRS rate is 50.5 cents per mile. So that is an extra $202 per alderman per month. That comes to just under $68K per year at the current IRS rate.

Aldermen are not well compensated until you consider the job is part time — $32,000/year plus a $4,200 expense allowance. Many aldermen have full time jobs that give them enough freedom to make day meetings. Do we really think each of the 28 aldermen are driving 400 miles for aldermanic business each and every month? I don’t think so.

Like everyone else the aldermen will need to find more efficient ways of getting around. At least one alderman, Phyllis Young, drives a Toyota Prius Hybrid.  Should she get the same allowance as someone that drives a less efficient vehicle?  What if an alderman only drives 175 for business in a given month?  What if they just buy their own damn gas like everyone else does?  If they don’t like it they can seek out alternatives.

Cherokee Street May Remain a “dry” Street

Ald. Craig Schmid (D-20th) is continuing his anti drinking establishment campaign in the 20th ward, which includes parts of Cherokee St West of Jefferson Ave. Schmid has introduced new legislation titled “Prohibiting package liquor in the 20th Ward.” (see BB47) The exception is for restaurants that get at least 35% of their revenue from food sales.

Schmid’s attitude is summed up in the bill as legislative findings:

The existence of alcoholic beverage establishments appears to contribute directly to numerous peace, health, safety and general welfare problems including loitering, littering, drug trafficking, prostitution, public drunkenness, defacement and damaging of structures, pedestrian obstructions, as well as traffic circulation, parking and noise problems on public streets and neighborhood lots. The existence of such problems creates serious impacts on the health, safety and welfare of residents of single- and multiple-family residences within the district, including fear for the safety of children, elderly residents and of visitors to the district. The problems also contribute to the deterioration of the neighborhood and concomitant devaluation of property and destruction of community values and quality of life. The number of establishments selling alcoholic beverages and the associated problems discourage more desirable and needed commercial uses in the area. In order to preserve the residential character and the neighborhood-serving commercial uses of the area.

Wow, why do we allow such debauchery to run rampant throughout the rest of the city? Gee, maybe because he is operating under the false impression that prostitution will cease to exist if only people can’t buy a drink at a bar.

Oh but it gets better:

the Excise Commissioner shall have authority to:

(3) Issue a drink license only with the following conditions applied and enforced in an area with a Cherokee Street address from the west curbline of Iowa Avenue to the east curbline of Nebraska Avenue
16
A. No package liquor and premises must be operated as a restaurant with gross food sales constituting at least 35% of gross sales; and
B. Operator of the premises must have and maintain at all times written permission to use a public commercial parking facilities within 350 feet of the premis:
with a minimum of at least 15 parking spaces (paved, striped, having a six foot good quality, sturdy ornamental metal fence surrounding it and adequate lighting, and with concrete wheel stops, all complying with City of St. Louis requirements); and if there is live entertainment or live performances, with a minimum of at least 30 parking spaces (paved, striped, having a six foot good quality, sturdy ornamental metal fence surrounding it and adequate lighting, and with concrete wheel stops, all complying with City of St. Louis requirements); and having at a minimum at least 30 additional parking spaces for every 1000 square feet of business space in excess of the first 1000 square feet of business space.

Well, there we have it. More parking in an urban neighborhood commercial district.

And we all love establishments with cafe tables — as long as they keep a clear path. But what about a cafe table behind a 4ft high fence?

J. Sidewalk tables for restaurant purposes only may only be permitted in accordance with an extension of premises permit with an appropriate 4 foot high good quality, sturdy, black ornamental metal fence separating the tables from the rest of the minimum 4 foot wide public sidewalk;

The reality is nobody is going to open a wine bar under such conditions which probably suits Schmid just fine.  This isn’t a class thing for Schmid — the person who downs a $2 bud is just as bad as friends that share a $40 bottle of wine.

To the business association this legislation would be an impediment to competing with other commercial districts where the rules are less restrictive.  To me Schmid only knows how to run off perceived problems — he hasn’t a clue how to bring life back to a once thriving commercial street.

St Louis Centre; Different Owners, Different Standards

In 2005 the failed downtown mall, St. Louis Centre, was at the center of Mayor Slay’s priorities. At the time the Mayor and others were busy pushing Centre owner Barry Cohen to tear down the sky bridge that crosses over Washington Ave and move forward with redevelopment.

From the Mayor’s blog on Sept 25, 2005:

Stories in the business pages last week confirm the obvious. Barry Cohen, the owner of St. Louis Centre, is stalled. After a summer of fumbling, Mr. Cohen lost the funding proferred by Downtown Now’s Tom Reeves to demolish the skybridge.

Since purchasing the downtown mall more than a year ago, Mr. Cohen has promised, announced, floated, and projected some plans – none of which has come to anything. It is not clear to me whether he is hapless or canny, hoping for a profit on the $5.4 million the Biz Journal says he paid for the property.

Whatever.

As Tom Reeves told us, there’s plenty else to do Downtown. Meanwhile, we’ll keep sending Mr. Cohen those tax bills.

Wow, he had the mall for a whole year and the mayor calls him out. Slay supporter, now former developer John Steffen, was treated differently from day one:

Friday, February 17, 2006

This is a note to every developer hoping to be able to make a deal in the City and to every citizen hoping for redevelopment: John Steffen has announced ambitious plans to turn St. Louis Centre and the One City Centre office building into a mixed-use development.

These plans are possible because a public/private team, including Barb Geisman, Rodney Crim, Rollin Stanley, and Tom Reeves, kept their eyes on the goal line — not the headlines.

Not every real estate transaction can be negotiated in a blog.

I congratulate Barb, Rodney, Rollin, and Tom for their discipline — and I wish John good luck in getting this done.

This was well over two years ago and today the mall is totally vacant and the bridge still hovers over the street. Pyramid is out as developer with their equity partner Spinnaker taking over the now very stalled project. In fact, as reported here a week ago, Steffen and his company are out of the development business completely. Does this mean that Geisman and company dropped the ball? Were they all too cozy with Steffen?

Oh wait they did manage to give Steffen a sweetheart deal — a TIF backed by the city’s general revenues. That was also in 2006.

In the year and a half since then we’ve seen only slick marketing — drawing a line around a few blocks and calling it a district, The Mercantile Exchange or MX for short. That is almost as clever as the cards calling Ballpark Village a six block area (Broadway/5th to 8th and Clark to Walnut is 3 blocks no matter how many times they say otherwise).

So my question is this —does the city-backed TIF deal run with the property regardless of who takes over? If so, how long does Spinnaker have to complete the project? A year? Five years? A decade?

I think Steffen wanted this project so the city put up roadblocks for Cohen so he’d be forced to sell to Steffen.

Finally on Wednesday KMOX reported Pyramid’s story with greater detail and certainty than I had last Friday:

The developer of major St. Louis projects…St. Louis Centre and the former Dillard’s building, in the Mercantile exchange project…is getting out of the development business. Pyramid Construction’s John Steffen made the announcement through Steffen’s attorney Attorney Steven Goldstein… Problems in the real estate lending market are the main reason. Goldstein says Pyramid is currently working with other developers, investors, lenders and the city to make a transition for its development projects…but will continue to operate it’s property management division…which oversees a thousand apartment units in the city and surrounding area.

For someone with $609 million in development on his plate, Steffen has gone on a crash diet. Two years ago Steffen had this to say;

“We literally have more people offering to finance us than we have projects to finance,” Steffen said. “I need more projects because I have banks wanting to do business with me.”

Our city’s leaders bought Steffen’s hype. Or did Steffen buy off their better judgment with generous campaign contributions and illusions of success? Regardless our leadership has once again failed us. They claim Steffen was a victim of the current crisis but the roots of this go way back (see my post from June 2006) .
Perhaps we would have been better off giving Cohen a chance to prove himself? Of course then many of us wouldn’t have been able to enjoy the fancy parties thrown by Steffen for each project he announced. We sold out for some sushi.

I do hope all their projects are assumed by others and that they perform well. I also hope the next time we’ve got a developer bragging about his ability to get financing that we recognize the red flags.