Penrose Park House Saved….Maybe?

Last night the Preservation Board told the city’s Board of Public Service they could not raze a house on the corner of the Penrose Park. That is not exactly true, they cannot deny a permit but can only recommend. The Board of Public Service may well go ahead and raze the structure.

From the Cultural Resources report:

The building is an Arts and Crafts red brick structure constructed by a private owner in 1902. It was acquired by City ordinance in 1905 when the City created Penrose Park and was used as a Park Keeper’s House until the late 1980’s when it was abandoned as a residential use and boarded by the City.

Yes, eminent domain was alive and well in 1905 when the city took a man’s 3-year old home away from him. Park Keeper’s houses really don’t work today given how park maintenance is handled. However, these structures are making a comeback as local community offices, arts centers and other uses convenient to a park.

Granted, the city does not have the funds to renovate the structure. I suggested last night they use the demolition funds to mothball the building until a use can be found. This beautifully proportioned house could be a major asset to Penrose Park in the future.

The city is in the process of realigning Kingshighway on the edge of the park and moving a smaller park road to the east of this house. Neither road is blocked if the house remains. The only issue is a natural amphitheater that is planned for the site. The Board of Public Service presented no details on the exact size of the proposed earthen amphitheater nor why it could not be located adjacent to the house.

A Friends of Penrose Park needs to be formed to help secure the structure and find a new use. This may well bring new life, energy and pride to this park. I can also see the cyclists that use the recently repaved velodrome in the park helping with the effort, perhaps as a meeting place for their functions? This building is worth saving for our future generations.

For more info see the Preservation Board agenda. Also, read Michael Allen’s excellent essay on this building.

– Steve

Eminent Domain: Where Do We Go From Here?

The phrase ‘Eminent Domain’ has become as evil a phrase in the city as ‘Urban Renewal’, maybe more. I’ve yet to take a strong position on this debate so it is time I correct that. Click here to read a prior post on eminent domain from October 2005.

I’m going to start by putting on my best political top hat, ride the fence, and state the obvious:

Eminent Domain is a very useful tool that does have its place.

Eminent Domain has been increasingly abused, to a point beyond excessive.

Both sides of the debate on Eminent Domain need to step back and look for common ground.

Nobody wins as long as this debate continues.

The above are pretty much “safe” positions for one to take. In other words, no real substance. But I’m a substance kinda guy so here it goes.

No eminent domain for a Wal-Mart!!! Nor for any other “big box” store, chain or local. Don’t even think about taking someone’s personal home.

On the other side of the coin if we, as a city, through a quality urban planning process decide we need a new park, school or library then yes, I can see the use of eminent domain — even possibly taking someone’s personal residence. But I’d want to see hard evidence of two things, 1) the need does exist and 2) all other possible sites do not work.

Everything else is a very subjective quality issue for me. Take, for example, the recent issue in Richmond Heights of the area known as Hadley Township. I’ll be the first to admit that I probably wouldn’t be as upset about the use of eminent domain had the city selected the truly urban proposal from Conrad Properties. Some may claim I’m inconsistent or a hypocrite but let me elaborate.

Many things can be accomplished through good zoning. Dense & walkable neighborhoods can be created where suburban sprawl once existed. Increased density around a transit stop is, in my view, in the public good and therefore at least worthy of consideration for the use of eminent domain. Zoning in smart cities offers developers incentives as trade off for things in the public interest. Other times the incentives become mandates. So, if a developer is seeking eminent domain for an area I think they’ve got to earn it. This means to me minimum densities, little to no surface parking, 2-story minimum building heights (more depending upon circumstances), relationship with the sidewalk, bike parking, mixed uses and so on.

None of the requirements should be punitive to the developer but instead offer rewards for creating good urban design. This might mean the developer gets to build a floor or two higher than normally allowed or gets reduced parking requirements. By designing the zoning in such a way as to require good urban in-fill as a condition for the use of eminent domain then I can possibly be convinced a private development is in the best interests of the public.

A typical sprawl center, like Loughborough Commons now under construction, is not nor will it ever be in the public good to the point it justified the use (or threat of use) to take those people’s homes. It was wrong. More than enough land existed to create the horrible shopping center.

I think to some developers the project just is not complete unless they take away someone else’s property. If they’ve got 1 acre they want 2, if they have 6 they want 8. You don’t have to have an entire city block to build new construction! If you have a lot with 100 feet of frontage by 125 foot deep design a building to fit that parcel, don’t complain the guy next door won’t sell his vacant 50 foot wide lot. I think much of our areas are stagnant because developers waste precious time trying to find ways to assemble increasingly larger and larger parcels for overly complicated projects. In the meantime years go by and nothing is built. If you’ve got more than 25 feet of width you can construct a new building. Deal with it. Build on it or sell it to someone that will.

However, maybe I can be in a position at some point to take the as-yet-built McDonald’s on Grand and raze it for something urban? That might be the trick, if you build low-density suburban crap in the city you leave yourself wide open for eminent domain for a project achieving certain set criteria.

Eminent domain for road building should be a thing of the past, at least in established areas. We’ve got all the roads we need. Well, with a slight exception — I want back many of the streets and alleys that have been vacated over the years. Eminent domain to reclaim previously public streets and alleys should stick around. I should also separate out roads from highways. Building a new road to connect the street grid together is probably a good thing. Taking property for more highways, no so good.

And yes, on my site I am judge and jury. I’m making highly subjective value judgments. I know that, not necessary to point it out. Our zoning codes are entirely subjective value judgments — ours just happen to be based on what bureaucrats & officials thought in the late 1940s. Newly revised zoning codes would not say, “call Steve Patterson to find out the answer.” No, new zoning codes can incorporate judgments related to supporting our old urbanism as well as thinking from new urbanism. Let’s at least get to the point where we are debating the finer points of a new zoning code. Then, and probably only then, can we make any rational decisions around the use of eminent domain.

– Steve

A Few Downtown Observations

The Unitarian Universalist Church is having a big convention downtown. I’ve talked to a number of conventioneers over the last week with questions like, “Where are you from?” and “Are you enjoying your visit to St. Louis?”

I chatted with a couple of women the other day in City Grocers. They were asking one of the store staff if the place was open on Sunday because, “everything is closed on Sunday.” They had arrived a week ago and couldn’t find anything open. After the clerk said City Grocers was open daily I mentioned the crepes at Washington Ave. Post.

I’m not sure the hotel concierges really know what to recommend. Brian McGowan’s Washington Avenue Greensheet does a better job directing many people to places than the high dollar glossy advertising in hotel lobbies. Wayfinding — signs to direct visitors — is the next crucial step downtown. We are getting visitors from our region and beyond but we need to make sure they know where to go. It might be obvious to those of us that spend time downtown but to an outsider they don’t always know where to find the grocery store or some gelato for desert.

City Grocers was packed earlier today with conventioneers. I’ve always been a bit skeptical about the benefits of the millions spent on convention buildings & hotels but I’m sure City Grocers welcomed the traffic. Still, such conventions are not the norm. Too many cities have convention facilities and their are too few conventions to keep them all hopping year round.

A couple of weeks ago I was having a late lunch (3pm) at 10th Street Italian and I began talking to a couple sitting next to me. They were asking about a drug store. I gave them directions to the 4th floor Walgreen’s as well as City Grocers. We ended up talking for nearly an hour. They were from Atlanta and had only been to St. Louis once before, 15 years ago. In their late 50s they had lots of stories to tell about life in Atlanta. They are an interracial couple that have been married since before the days of Tom & Helen Willis but they say it has never been much of an issue even in the deep south. They are involved in city life there so we talked urbanity and such. Their impressions of St. Louis were positive (I’ll have to email them for final impressions following their trip).

A big music fest was held on Washington Avenue yesterday. I didn’t know about it until today. Not that I would have gone, I tend to avoid big events. On the 17th another big block party was held. Lots of pretty glossy literature was handed out prior but it failed to mention one thing — the event date. Yes, big event with expensive marketing and no date! It also rained that day. I think we need to reconsider such events.

I’m not saying we should not have a big even now and then but it seems like it is feast or famine. I’d love for the folks running the show (Downtown Partnership and/or the businesses) to hire some local street performers, just not all at once. Each weekend have something going on. A mime, a juggler, a violinist, a dummer (steel drums are awesome), a guy doing balloon figures, etc… Make it so whenever someone is downtown in the evening something interesting is going on. It doesn’t require a billboard, glossy literature, blocking the street, bringing in portable johns or other such issues. Maybe a saxophonist one night with a bluegrass trio another. Mix it up and spread it out. I think they all blow their entire marketing budget on a few events. By having different folks on different days and at different times it will look more spontaneous.

The drumming circles that form in the Delmar Loop are excellent. This is something that can’t really be planned. It just happens. But, you can create the atmosphere where such performances are seen as welcomed. Having outdoor places where people can play games such as Chess, Go or Pente would be nice as well.

Of course, as a friend said to me this morning as we were enjoying our crepes al fresco on Washington Ave., you’d need these performers to play near the valet stands. Customers for places like Copia and Lucas Park Grille don’t seem too willing to participate in city life by say, parking their own car and walking a block or two. I also love good performers that entertain. I once watched a couple of guys in Vancouver keep a huge audience laughing as they did magic tricks which included audience participation. Last year in NYC I saw some young men dancing and telling jokes in Washington Square, the crowd loved it.

This city has some talented folks and most probably don’t need a large stage and sound system to do their thing. For $20,000 a year or so the Partnership could get people to perform 2-3 nights a week for a few hours for the entire year. I heard the budget on the no-date event was $40,000.

The Valet companies are still being abusive, holding public parking spaces for their paying customers. I think this will change quickly when other businesses open up in remaining storefronts. I doubt Joe Edwards will tolerate Copia consuming the entire southern half of Washington between 11th and Tucker.

The city needs to step in with some leadership and create some rules to govern just how much space is needed for a single business to operate valet — the dropping off and picking up of cars. At no point should valet companies, collecting a fee or being paid by a business, be allowed to park customer’s cars in public parking spaces.

Downtown has come a long way in the last five years but it will be the next five that will likely amaze everyone. We’ve yet to see the true impact of all the new residents and local business. Downtown is only at the early stage in the recovery process. It can still go wrong but even with some mistakes just the numbers of people will make it better and better each passing year.

Last December we saw a draft CBD traffic study but things have been silent since. The plan for 2006 was to change out controllers so the city could computerize the timing and manipulation of signals from a single location. This could help in facilitating special events as well as making it easier to facilitate rush hour traffic. But, six months later I’ve not seen any real changes to the setup or even heard a word about it. Hey Barb, what is going on?

I just had to share the above so I could move on with my Sunday. What are your thoughts on the above topics or do you have your own downtown observations?

– Steve

How Long is Too Long?

In March 2007 we will have primary elections for the 14 even numbered wards in the City of St. Louis. Out of curiosity I stopped at the Board of Aldermen yesterday to get a copy of their seniority list. Wow, no wonder they don’t put this info on their website — many have been around since we had over 400,000 residents (452,804 in 1980 & 396,685 in 1990).

I can imagine being in government that long might give you a less than fresh perspective. I can also conceive that seeing the population drop over 20% since you’ve been in office might make you a bit jaded about what it takes to bounce back. This is why I think we need some fresh thinkers at the Board of Aldermen.

Back to the upcoming Spring ’07 election. Below I’ve listed all 14 incumbent aldermen, their ward, how many years they will have served come 2007 and how many terms that represents. Some people have served some odd years due to being sworn in following a special election or I believe in one case they switched from odd to even during the last redistricting.

I personally think we should have term limits with a maximum of 2 terms for a total of 8 years. Some have previously expressed here that 8 years is not enough. Well, how about 12 years? Being Alderman should not be a life-long entitlement.

Based strictly on how long they’ve been in office I think the following need to not run again in 2007, move on and let some fresh thinking have a chance:

•Fred Heitert; 12th Ward: 28 years (7 terms).
• Terry Kennedy, 18th Ward: 18 years (4.5 terms).
• Stephen Conway, 8th Ward: 16+ years (4 terms).
• Stephen Gregali, 14th Ward: 12 years (3 terms)
• Craig Schmid; 20th Ward: 12 years (3 terms)

Craig Schmid is the only Alderman that I really know from the above list. While Schmid and I agree on some things we disagree on many more. I do like that we can have a discussion, disagree and remain friendly — something some other Aldermen seem incapable of doing. I also like that Schmid, at times, is willing to break ranks with their rules of status quo. For these reasons I might be willing to give him a due pass on length of service for one more term. Maybe…

Fred Heitert, the lone Republican. Well, I think he is the only one to admit being Republican. Others simply think & act that way but are Democrats because this is a democratic town. Jimmy Carter was President when Heitert was first sworn into office.

Terry Kennedy must have been quite young when he was first elected, I like that. I’ve heard some good things about Kennedy but I don’t see him as being someone to bring fresh new ideas to the table.

Stephen Conway, the alderman that asked the Preservation Board to ignore their ordinance driven rules to “reconsider” the denial of a homeowner to retain incorrect windows he installed in a historic district without a building permit.

Which brings me to Stephen Gregali. Of the above list I think Gregali is the one I’d most like to see defeated next Spring. For evidence of his mentality (and quite honestly many others) read an email exchange I had with him last month.

Again, I really think we need to have term limits set at 8 years just to create a flow of fresh thinking. The following all will have served two full terms next Spring when they seek a third term:

• Lyda Krewson, 28th Ward: 9 years (2+ terms)
• Lewis E. Reed, 6th Ward: 8 years (2 terms)
• Dionne Flowers, 2nd Ward: 8 years (2 terms)

And the last six seeking reelection next Spring have all served only one term. In the case of two, they’ve served very little after being elected to fill vacancies following a recall of the previous Alderman. I would not seek to replace any of these Aldermen strictly on the basis of time served. Their thought process, willingness to go along with Aldermanic Courtesy, and other actions may tell a different story.

• Joseph Vollmer, 10th Ward: 4 years (1 term)
• Jeffrey Boyd, 22nd Ward: 4 years (1 term)
• Frank Williamson, 26th Ward: 4 years (1 term)
• Donna Baringer; 16th Ward: 4 years (1 term)
• O.L. Shelton, 4th Ward; since June 10, 2005
• William Waterhouse, 24th Ward: since December 16, 2005

In Spring 2009 we are back to the odd numbered wards. I’m not going to go through all 14 of those but I will highlight some of the more entrenched members:

In 2009 both Phyllis Young (7th) and Fred Wessels (13th) will have “served” for 24 years. Six full terms! Sorry you two, time to move on. Run for another office, go fishing, just don’t keep hanging around.

Not far behind is Joe Roddy (17th) who will have served 21 years when his current term expires in 2009 — that is assuming he survives the current recall attempt announced yesterday.

Freeman Bosley Sr. (3rd) will mark 20 years as Alderman in 2009. I think 5 terms is than enough time in office although he hasn’t quite managed to raze every structure in the 3rd Ward so I assume he’ll want more time to finish destroying his bit of the city. Jeffrey Hardin came so close to defeating him last Spring…

I do not know a thing about Gregory Carter, Alderman from the 27th Ward, other than having been elected in 1993. So at the 2009 elections he will have served a full four terms or 16 years. Plenty in my book. Start thinking about a run for another office Mr. Carter.

Matt Villa, April Ford-Griffin, and Mike McMillan were elected in the Spring of 1997. McMillan is most likely to be our next License Collector so he gets a nod of a approval for moving on after 9 years in the same position. Villa and Griffin both will have been in office 12 years when they are up for reelection. Both have some of the worst new development projects in the city located within their wards. Villa & Griffin need to be replaced in 2009.

Ken Ortman (9th) is a very likable guy, certainly the most atypical of all the Aldermen (he owns a bar in Soulard and has a tattoo). Sill, after 10 years in office (as of 2009 election) I think it is time to move on. He is also a proponent of the Aldermanic Courtesy system.

And lastly we have Jennifer Florida who, if she stays off the recall effort, will have been in office for 8 years. That will be about 6 years too long in my view. I’ve liked her and supported her in the past but I’ve just been witness to way too much to let this one slide by. If the recall doesn’t happen I’m certain she will not make it past the 2009 election.

Nearly 36% (10 of 28) of our Board of Aldermen will have been in office at least 12 years in the Spring of 2007. Another 21% will have been around 8 years.

Aldermanic President Jim Shrewsbury was first elected to the Board of Aldermen in 1983 (16th Ward). After 19 years he became President of the Board of Aldermen in late 2002. I knew that Jim Shrewbury became President after Francis Slay left the position in April 2001, when he was elected Mayor, but I had to call him to to clarify why he was not sworn in until November 2002. The answer was more complicated than I thought:

The rules of the Board of Aldermen [charter of the City of St. Louis] states the position of President of the Board of Aldermen, a city wide elected position, will remain vacant until the next scheduled primary and general elections. In the meantime, the Board VP will assume the role of the President without the title (although with the pay). When Slay became Mayor in 2001 Shrewsbury was the VP, so he served in that capacity while also serving as 16th Ward alderman. The next primary was August 2002 where Shrewsbury defeated challenger Lyda Krewson (55% to 45%). In the November 2002 primary he was not challenged and we sworn in once the results were certified. He also had to resign as 16th Ward Alderman upon taking the job of President.

In the March 2003 election Jim Shrewsbury had to run again although this time he was not challenged. Donna Baringer won the 16th Ward aldermanic seat handily by getting 50% of the votes in a 3-way race. Got all that?

Currently Phyllis Young is VP, Fred Wessels is Floor Leader and Joe Roddy is Assistant Floor Leader. Every two years, following the general election, they draw cards to see among the people elected on the same day who has greater seniority. This is why Young has more seniority than Wessels, even though they were both sworn in on the same date.

The Board of Aldermen need to indicate on their website how long each member has been in office. This is relevant data for people when considering if they should, themselves, run for office and when folks are voting. I think they are a bit too embarrassed they’ve been around this long and we are where we are today. I think we must, as voters, look at how long they’ve each been in office and what they accomplished for their ward and the city while they have been there. It should not be an assumed they should remain in office simply because they’ve been there for years (or decades). Being Aldermen should not be a permanent career.

[Updated 6/24/06 @ 7pm — corrected paragraph to clarify that it is the city’s charter, not the rules of the Board of Aldermen, that indicates the President of the Board will remain vacant until the next general election. This applies to the Mayor and Comptroller as well. ]

– Steve

Rumor: QuikTrip to Relocate Bevo Location

This just in, apparently QuikTrip corporation is planning to close its location on Gravois just south of Delor in the Bevo neighborhood and relocate up the street at Gravois & Chippewa.

I’m told this was revealed at a Clifton Heights neighborhood meeting recently. The site in question is the southwest corner of Gravois & Chippewa, currently a pre-owned lot for McMahon Ford.

The site in question is in the 25th Ward, where I unsuccessfully ran for alderman last year against incumbent Dorothy Kirner. A quick check of campaign finance reports shows QT contributed $300, the maximum amount, to Kirner’s campaign just days after the primary election last year. I have not reviewed other documents to look for additional contributions.

My questions are two-fold. Will they build solely on the existing auto dealer parking lot? Also, what will become of their old site?

– Steve