City Owns Land For Proposed City Hospital Square Retail Project

Recently sprawl apologists have defended the proposed City Hospital Square (aka Georgian Square) as a property rights issue — the developers should have the right to build what they want on their land (see prior post). I, however, contend the community has the right to set the bar for what gets constructed where through tools such as Land Use & Zoning policies. These tools, like eminent domain, are valuable to municipalities to maintain the health, safetey and welfare of a community.

But what about when it is the community itself that owns the vacant land in question? Yes folks, with the exception of a few parcels, the City of St. Louis through the Land Reutilization Authority (LRA) and the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) own the land in question for Phase 1 of the project. Some of the land on the southern edge is owned by the State of Missouri. A few small parcels are owned by individuals in St. Louis and out of state — none in the names of the principals of the developers.
So how is it that we already have an announced project on predominently publicly owned land? Given that agendas for these various boards are only posted in the lobby of 1015 Locust it is entirely possible I missed the announcements of the Request for Proposal (RFP) seeking developers for this land. I suppose it is also possible that I missed the meeting(s) in which the city selected Guilded Age and their associates. But maybe, just maybe, it is possible that a few key steps were omitted in order to give this a “done deal” appearance so that owners of the adjacent blocks would simply roll over and accept the city’s offer to buy their homes from them.

This is the city, through various boards and Ald. Phyllis Young, actively participating in the deliberate demolition and threat of eminent domain without public input. Public input should have been solicited early on as the city began acquiring property across from the long-vacant city hospital. Instead it appears we have an end-run around the public in order to plop down an auto-centric suburban model between two very dense neighborhoods.

Why not have an open RFP to see if a more urban-minded developer would come to the table to bring a decent mixed-use project to the site that works with the existing residential to the East? What about a design charette to get the community interested in the future of the site? Maybe a competition where local architecture & planning professionals (and students) might form teams to develop concepts for how to creatively use the site to enable Lafayette Ave to reconnect the Lafayette Square and Soulard neighborhoods?

I will be making a formal request to see if indeed a RFP was issued and Guilded Age selected as the designated developer for this site.

Old School Pals: Democrat Alderman Fred Wessels Backs Republican Fred Heitert in Re-Election

Local Democrat, Ald Fred Wessels of the 13th Ward, has given $500 of his campaign funds to the campaign of Republican Fred Heitert who is seeking retain the 12th Ward seat he was first elected to in the year in which the following events happened:

• YMCA sued the hot new group, The Village People, over their hit song YMCA.
• Patty Hearst is released from prison after he sentence is commuted by President Jimmy Carter.
• Margaret Thatcher becomes the new Prime Minister for England.
• Iran hostage crisis begins.
• Heath Ledger, a star in Brokeback Mountain, born on April 4th.
• Deaths of stars such as Emmett Kelley (b. 1898), Mary Pickford (B. 1892), John Wayne (b. 1907), & Vivian Vance (b. 1909)
• TV Series such as The Facts of Life, The Dukes of Hazzard, Benson and This Old House all premier this year. Other series such as What’s Happening!!, Welcome Back, Kotter; Good Times and Wonder Woman cease production.
• The top grossing film was Every Which Way But Lose.
• The Sugar Hill Gang introduced the commercial world to rap with “Rapper’s Delight” (video on YouTube, history on Wiki). Currently known as old school rap.
• A first class stamp was a mere $0.15.

You can check out the 1979 Wikipedia for more interesting facts. TV Land is also a good way to catch up on the pop culture from the period for those of you not yet born when Heitert was first elected to office. But I’m getting off subject…

Since when do local Democrats give money to Republicans or vice versa? How would you feel as a donor to a Democrat to have that candidate turn around and give some of that money to a Republican? If we are going to continue to have partisan voting in this city this should be an outrage. To verify the contribution from Wessels see Heitert’s 8 Days Before Primary Report (PDF, p2).

I’m sure Wessels and Heitert are old friends by now considering Wessels has been in office since April 1985 — the year I graduated high school. Yep, well over 20 years of hanging out together at the good ole boy social club known as the St. louis Board of Aldermen.

Since I turn 40 tomorrow I’m going to use this post as a stroll down memory lane. From the year 1985:

• Ronald Reagan was sworn into his second term as President. I didn’t say good memories, just memories. Although at this point we had not had a President Bush (H.W. or Dubya).
• ‘We Are the World’ recorded to help famine relief in Africa
• Nelson Mandela is still imprisoned.
• Commodore launches the Amiga personal computer.
• VH-1 debuts
• First class stamp cost $0.20.
• Coke tries a new formula billed as the “New Coke”
• Rock Hudson dies of AIDS.
• The film The Color Purple premiers.
• Tina Turner wins award after award for song & album, “What’s Love Got To Do With It”
• Wham!’s “Careless Whisper” tops charts. Our very cool high school english teacher uses song in class lesson, writes part of the lyrics on blackboard, “I’m never gonna dance again, guilty feet have got no rhythm”

The sad thing is with this city we can’t just hop into a Delorean and change events, we simply can’t go Back to the Future.

A Few Endorsements for the March 6th Primary

Below are a few endorsements in the upcoming election. My detractors will say “who cares” which is fine — if my view doens’t matter then simply skip this post. I had hoped to send out a questionnaire to all the candidates but time got away from me between work and grad school (see post with topics from me and readers).

I will be doing another post on the President’s race between Jim Shrewsbury and Lewis Reed. In the meantime here are the challenged races for the even numbered aldermanic seats.

26th Ward – No Endorsement

I’ve not met incumbent Frank Williamson but I have met challenger H. Lee Willis. Willis is young and energetic but I didn’t care for his thoughts on the committee people being the go between with constituents and the alderman. While I tend to favor challengers I did not see enough in Willis to justify an endorsement. Voters in the 26th Ward can vote for Willis to register an objection vote with the status quo.

24th Ward – No Endorsement

Ald. Waterhouse is likely a nice guy but he is just not progressive enough to earn my endorsement. He comes from the establishment end of things too. I must say, his response to Tom Bauer running for the seat that he lost in 2005 was very well written. Still, I don’t feel that I can “endorse” Waterhouse. That said, please 24th ward voters don’t put Bauer back in office!

22nd Ward – No Endorsement

I do not know incumbent Jeffrey Boyd or challenger Jay Ozier. I’m also more familiar with other northside wards than the 22nd. Perhaps you the readers would like to chime in on this race?

20th Ward – Galen Gondolfi

I like incumbent Craig Schmid, he is open and honest and genuinely cares about his ward and the city. He has stood up against his follow aldermen at times and has been punished as a result. I have a great deal of respect for Schmid. Unfortunately, I also think he is stuck in a previous decade where running out the bad element was the first order of the day. Thanks to Schmid, the ward and neighborhoods where he serves have changed for the better. Yet, I don’t feel his strategy has changed with the times. He is opposed to rental units to the extreme yet we’ve all been renters at one time or another. His vision for the ward is likely that every single property is an owner-occupied single family house and the commercial districts are very respectable. Well, this ain’t St. Louis Hills. It is a dynamic area where a mix of residential units and some colorful businesses are entirely appropriate.

I’m not totally cool with Galen Gondolfi, I’m concerned he might go too far and focus only on affordable housing. However, I feel that I have heard enough to think he is not simply a one-issue candiate (alcohol sales on Cherokee). His background in urban planning certainly warms my heart. On March 6th I urge 20th Ward voters to elect Galen Gondolfi.

18th Ward – No Endorsement

Wow, Terry Kennedy vs. Bill Haas.

Neither? Like the bulk of the wards, I don’t see a vision coming from Kennedy. He allows buildings to easily be razed by not including his ward in the preservation review process where the Preservation Board gets to determine if a building should be destroyed or not. New development is happening in the ward but I think that is more a matter of proximity than leadership.

Bill Haas on the other hand is not someone I can fully take seriously. It seems like he has run for nearly every office in the city. This year he filed for both this seat and a school board seat (he has withdrawn from that race).

12th Ward – Matt Browning in the Republican Primary

I’ve not met Browning or incumbent Heitert in person. I’ve seen Heitert at various events, such as the opening of the trail at River Des Peres. I have communicated with Browning via email and feel he is a viable candidate with a variety of civic interests just as most of us do. Yes, he lost his legs while serving as a St. Louis Police Officer — a tragedy indeed but not the reason I feel he should prevail. Age is not really an issue for me but I simply think Heitert has been around too long (elected in 1979) to be effective at bringing a new wave of thinking to the ward. It is time to move on and we need to give Browning consideration to step up to public service.

With the Aldermanic Presidents race on the Democratic ticket, will anyone in the 12th ward take a Republican ballot?

6th Ward – Christian Saller

Like the other races, I’m not totally thrilled with the views of the candidates. Of course, I’ve yet to meet another person with whom I agree 100% so I shouldn’t expect as much from political candidates. Patrick Cacchione is a nice enough guy (unless you are critical of him and then meet him at a downtown Gelato place) but I feel his is too insider, too establishment. His years of public service were spent speaking on behalf of those paying him – a lobbyist. In short, I don’t trust him. To be fair, I don’t trust many in office currently so it is not like he is alone in that. I also don’t think he is going to lose any sleep over what I think.

Kacie Starr Triplett is a great person and outstanding candidate for the Board of Aldermen. My biggest concern here was her acceptance of the city’s charter — I do think it needs a major overhaul. I think her youth and so-called lack of experience actually work in her favor — she is not so entrenched in old world St. Louis politics the way others at city hall are. Still, I am concerned for whom she might learn.
Christian Saller is the best choice in the 6th Ward. Saller is not a perfect choice, but the best choice. On the downside I think he might too easily go along with other aldermen on their projects although that is probably no different than the other two choices. The reason I like Saller is because of his experience. Currently aldermen are playing the role of development middlemen yet only a handful know the difference between good and bad development. Most simply see the dollar amount and think more is better. Saller, when elected, would likely be the most qualified alderman at city hall on good urban development.

4th Ward – No Endorsement

I need to meet Sam Moore, the challenger to O.L. Shelton.

St. Louis To Use Eminent Domain to Raze Owner-Occupied Homes for Auto-Centric Retail

Ald. Phyllis Young, up for re-election in only two years, is seeking eminent domain to take people’s homes for a second phase of a project that hasn’t even started construction on the first phase. The project, Georgian Square, is to be located across Lafayette Ave from the former city hospital which is being reborn as The Georgian condos. Still, everyone calls it City Hospital. As such, I will call the proposed development City Hospital Square or CHS for short.

By now you’ve probably heard about or read about this proposed development. The phase II area, with existing buildings include three newer homes (roughly from 2000) is in a “Neighborhood Preservation Area” per the city’s 2005 Comprehensive Land-Use Plan:

Areas where the existing housing and corner commercial building stock will be preserved and augmented with new infill residential and corner commercial development physically integrated with, and primarily serving the immediate neighborhood. These areas generally consist of stable residential areas of the City, including but not limited to historic districts, where the character of the neighborhood is currently well preserved with relatively few vacant lots and abandoned buildings. The plan contemplates continued preservation and improvement, with quality rehabilitation and infill new construction that is sensitive to the character of existing residences. Commercial and institutional uses catering to the immediate needs of the neighborhood are acceptable and reflect the traditional role such activity has played in the history of the City.

I’ve re-read the above paragraph numerous times and I still can’t find the part where it talks about forcing people out of their properties and razing viable structures for more suburban schlock. What is being said, through Ald. Young, is it doesn’t matter what we say on paper or where you buy your house, a Walgreen’s takes priority. In a city littered with vacant land it is criminal to contemplate razing both wonderful old properties as well as nearly new homes.

However, the bulk of the land is vacant, as soon as they finish razing the row houses along Lafayette. This land is located in a “Regional Commerce Area” per the Land-Use Plan:

Areas where the development of existing and commercial uses intended to serve a regional clientele should be encouraged. Developments in these areas will often be new projects. These areas generally consist of existing regional commercial uses or large sites at intersections of major roads/highways with regional access and visibility. Several large and currently underutilized sites exist in the City at prominent intersections. These locations provide “ready to go” locations for large format retailers with strong adjacent markets.

This area, without a doubt, needs new construction. The question is, what form will this new construction take? While I agree with others saying the old Foodland site on Jefferson @ Lafayette would be a better choice the fact is both sites need new construction. I’m not going to get into a debate about which should come first. Both need to be redeveloped and both need to be done so in a clearly urban manner — in other words no big parking lots between the entrance and public sidewalk.

Need more parking? Put in under, on top of, next to or behind the main buildings — just not out front. That kinda development just shouldn’t fly in such an urban area. Well, perhaps that is why they want to raze the block of existing buildings — to make less urban. I really think developers have some sick need to control more land than necessary. When defending the use of eminent domain to gain site control advocates will always talk about “some guy in the middle” holding out for more than his property is worth. But in the case of Loughborough Commons and here the houses in question are on the edge. The developers simply assume, no matter how much land they have already, they need that last little bit to make their project work. I sometimes think if they had a 500 acres but another 10 was off in a corner but on a major road they’d want that — saying their proejct simply won’t work without it.

The problem is our developers, elected officials, architects, planners, engineers and related professions haven’t learned how to develop in a tight land market. As more and more city property is being redeveloped it is only going to get harder and harder for developers to make big land deals. They will need to learn to design projects more densely and not assume they can wipe away an adjacent block. The result will actually be better projects — more building(s) on a given parcel of land. This will make the area more walkable and most likely more desired.

Of course our ancient zoning remains a key player in our problems in the city. It is based on a cheap land, cheap gas model where parking is king. It is hard to push a developer to do expensive underground parking (think Target on Hampton) when the developer down the street might do a massive surface parking lot. The solution is we as a city must embrace an urban form that makes the city a city. That means our standards moving forward should set maximums on the amount of surface parking while offering rewards for more urban forms of parking. Such a reward might be allowing the developer to build an additional floor(s) on their project to make up for the additional parking expense. Getting our aldermen to wake up and see the possibilities, however, is the big challenge. Replacing them might well be easier than trying to educate them.

Here is what needs to happen with City Hospital Square:

• The Phase II takings of private property needs to be dropped completely.
• The possible taking of a few vacant pacels in the block between Tucker & 13th should be considered, provided a project is not in the works already for that vacant land.
• The main project needs to be redesigned placing buildings up to Lafayette Ave with the only parking in front being on-street parking.
• These buildings should be 2-4 stories in height along Lafayette.
• Similarly, buildings along 13th Street need to face 13th, not turning their back on the adjacent residential.
• Some form of shared parking needs to be considered — this might be underground, a common parking structure, roof-top, or back lot should be used for the main project. Very small amounts of surface lots may be appropriate to provide accessible spaces near entrances.
• Bike, scooter & motorcyle parking needs to be provided as space saving alternatives to typical parking.
• Sidewalks from Soulard to the East and Lafayette Square to the West need to be evaluated and updated as necessary to make the area as pedestrian friendly as possible.

Mississippi River Bridge: Last Option is the Best Option

A proposed new bridge across the Mississippi River is back in the news of late. Missouri and Illinois still cannot agree on how to pay for the bridge “now estimated to cost between $999 million and $1.76 billion.” (P-D 2/1/07). Call me a synic but if they are estimating such a range I’m going to go with the high end or better when the final bill is paid. In no way do I believe that it would come in under a billion. I’m going to go with $1.5 billion.

So we have several choices: the big highway bridge, a more cost-effective “coupler” built near the existing King Bridge and lastly we have a proposal to fix some of the existing interchanges, a new I-64 interchange in Illinois and redo parts of Illinois Route 3. The feds have already earmarked $239 million for the bridge project — money that presumably can go for this work. Interestingly, these little third option strategies are all items that need to be done anyway. I say stop wasting time on the bridge debate and get to work on fixing the areas that need fixing. Get the bottleneck areas resolved. Is this too short term and not the long-range planning I prefer we do? Perhaps.

I still question the “need” for a new bridge, especially one costing over a billion dollars to construct. Keep in mind that the old McKinley bridge will be reopening for traffic (including cyclists) in September connecting just north of downtown to Illinois Route 3 to Granite City and Madison County. This combined with the King Bridge and Eads Bridge into downtown can handle considerable local traffic. The new bridge as proposed will, in my view, simply shift sprawl from the Western edge of our region (St. Charles County) to the far Eastern edge of the region. Proponents say this will help re-center the City of St. Louis within the region. I suppose that is true, but so would curbing the sprawl through various Smart Growth measures employed by other regions. A billion or so would do wonders in the region for curbing sprawl and building more localized transit.

Frankly, if someone wants to buy a big house way out in Illinois and doesn’t like the traffic on I-64 they have several choices. One, move closer so the drive is not so long. They can get off the highway and take local streets that will get them across the river on other bridges besides the Poplar Street Bridge (aka the PSB). They can utilize the excellent MetroLink light rail system that serves a good portion of St. Clair County in Illinois or bus service to the city from Madison County Transit. Perhaps Illinois with its substantial transportation funding could help out Madison County by helping fund their proposed MetroLink extension.

This bridge, if finally built will not grow our region. It will simply shift suburban sprawl around a bit — a zero sum gain for the region. And simply put, the more lanes you build the more volume will increase putting you right back where you started at some point. As we’ve seen in the past, the city will remain a pass-through. Let’s fix the areas that need fixing and then work on moving people & jobs closer to the center — both in Illinois and Missouri.