The McDonald’s Saga Continues

This morning’s hearing on the proposed McDonald’s at 3708 S. Grand was interesting to say the least. On one side we had folks from Pyramid, a McDonald’s rep, the McDonald’s franchise owner and Alderman Jennifer Florida. On the other side you me, a number of nearby residents and Alderman Craig Schmid.

Here is a brief summary:

The part after the meeting was better than the meeting. I watched as residents had words with Ald. Florida (I always like a free show). Myself and others opposing the project are getting organized for the bigger fight on remaining hearings on the project. Look for the campaign to kick off in the near future!

Earlier today I was finally able to get a copy of the site plan for the project. OMG, It is worse than I had expected.

The plan is also interesting in what it does not include. The “F” Neighborhood Commercial District requires a number of things before permitting a conditional use when adjacent to a residential district. One item is:

f. Parking areas shall be screened at all property line with a 10-foot landscaped strip contiguous with or directly across an alley or public or private easement, other than a public street, from any existing residential use or dwelling district. Parking area screens shall consist of a minimum 2-foot high berm and a masonry or wood barrier that is at least 70 percent opaque and not less than 6 feet in height and shall be maintained in good order.

In this case they show 15 parking spaces along the eastern edge of the site which is across an alley from a residential district. But the plan conveniently omits the required 10-foot landscaped strip along the alley. Out front we’ve got another issue:

g. A landscape strip not less than 3 feet in width shall be provided along all public streets and shall contain 2-foot high solid landscaping or a masonry wall not less than 2 feet in height except that these elements shall not be required in approved driveways. Street trees shall be installed in the tree lawn, between the public sidewalk and public street, when the tree lawn has sufficient width, or street trees with gates shall be installed in public sidewalks where the sidewalk has sufficient width and is on an earth base with a minimum of 25 feet between trees not including driveways. A minimum of 15% of the lot area shall be landscaped, including screening areas.

Looks like they might have 3 feet of landscaping at one point out front but barely. No landscaping is indicated on the drawings other than to indicate a few areas as landscaped. Lots of asphalt though!

The building occupies only 10% of the total site. 10%!!! Sorry, you can’t get any more suburban than that!

Ald. Florida said the project was “pedestrian-friendly” yet I see no evidence of such. At no point is a sidewalk provided for pedestrians to walk from the public sidewalk to the entrance of the establishment. If you are coming from the neighborhood to the east your only means of entering the site is through the 30-foot wide in/out drive and then walking through the drive area to the front corner of the building. If you are on Grand and wish to enter the restaurant you have the same situation, you must enter the site through the automobile entrance & exit areas. And if you are in a wheelchair you must wheel about 85 feet as if you are heading toward the drive-thru lane before you get to the one ADA ramp. Yeah right, pedestrian friendly my…

No bicycle parking is indicated either. From the looks of things this does not appear to be any different than a McDonald’s they’d build along a suburban highway exit ramp.

Once I get the document in PDF format I’ll do another post so everyone can see for themselves.

Proposed McDonald’s, A Story of Aldermanic Deception & Suburban Design

Alderman Florida flat out lied. Not an omission of a few details. No sir, a bold faced lie.

I sat next to Alderman Florida on Monday as the proposed McDonald’s at 3708 S. Grand was discussed before the Commercial District Committee of the Dutchtown South Community Corporation. She claimed to not have any graphics to show the group of the proposal, instead she showed site plans for the nearby Southside National Bank project. Yet, in her possession was a site plan for the McDonald’s project. When questioned on the subject she claimed the site plan she had was not the final plan. Digging a deeper hole she said a current site plan did not exist, that nothing had been submitted. We were puzzled at the idea of a public hearing on the zoning of a drive-thru could be held without a site plan. The truth is it can’t.

Florida also tried to play dumb on the details of the proposal, claiming she didn’t know if they were using the full site or not.

Alderman Florida briefly unfolded the site plan and I was able to get a good look at it. The plan uses the full 40,000sf site (approximately 200ft x 200ft), includes new curb cuts on Grand and Winnebego, lots of parking and a drive through. As is typical with these fast food places, the building is set back from both streets with drive lanes between the public sidewalk and building. On the Winnebego side parking, a drive and the drive-thru separate pedestrians from the building.

Florida described the McDonald’s as an “urban-style” building. Let’s see, we have a large site where roughly 5% of the land will be covered in building with the remaining 95% in asphalt. Plus the building is set back from the sidewalk and is only one-story in height. I’m just not seeing anything to make this urban. Oh yes, I forgot, it has red brick. So taking the standard formula painted concrete block McDonald’s and put some red brick on the place and all of a sudden it is urban? Sorry, I don’t think so.

Damn, I hate being lied to.

Right to my face no less!
… Continue Reading

Political Reform Needed in City of St. Louis

A year ago I was in the middle of a race to become alderman for the 25th Ward. As we gear up for elections this year it has caused me to think about the current state of local elective politics. Two things need to change to make the system more open and truly representative.

First, we need to drop the partisan elections at the local level. The current system of having Democrats and Republican’s means little at the local level. The partisan system helps keep the entrenched in their places and does nothing to improve the quality of the elected officials. Besides, local Democrats have no philosophical relationship with state or national Democrats.

The next issue is money. Lots of it.

How is it that an Alderman can take his treasury from an aldermanic account and use it to run for License Collector? I think some of our elected officials worry too much about the cash and not enough on what we need to move forward.

I propose this for local elections — limit campaign contributions to the annual compensation of the job sought. If the job pays $32K a year that is the maximum for any contested election cycle. No more of this amassing over $100K in campaigns for aldermanic races. What does the mayor make? $150K or so? Fine, that would be the ceiling on campaign contributions for mayoral candidates every four years.

And no moving money around from one campaign to another. If people donated to an aldermanic candidate then that is what that money is for, not for financing a bigger and better race later.

And while we are at it I think the campaign treasuries should go back to zero the day after the election. If a winning-candidate has $5,000 left after the race then it needs to go to a non-profit or to the city’s general revenues. That puts them back at zero. This might seem counter-productive to get them to not chase local Abramhoff’s but hear me out. If a strong candidate for alderman is either unchallenged or only marginally challenged then they have little incentive to build up to their $32K limit knowing they’d have to give it away (not back). This would hopefully level the playing field.

Without the old guard Democratic machine to keep newcomers out and a limit on simply buying into the race by intimidating potential opponents with your bank balance we have a chance to evaluate candidates on crazy criteria like performance and vision.

– Steve

Ald. McMillan v. Elliot Davis

Last night I caught a Channel 2 “You Paid For It Segment” where “reporter” Elliot Davis questioned Alderman Mike McMillan.

Davis in his usual attack style raised a valid question — the expenditure of a million or so tax dollars on streetscape improvements along a section of Martin Luther King Drive. A section that has few buildings and a few of the ones that it does are crumbling.

I recently wrote;

I think it is important to send a message of hope to current residents & business owners as well as those that are prospective residents and/or business owners. My fear is that sidewalks and street lamps is a little too late.

Contrary to Davis, I think the expenditures in the area are not enough. How does Davis expect the area to improve without some capital expenditure on the city’s part. Davis is solely interested in sensationalism and not about an intelligent discussion on revitalizing decayed areas of our city.

McMillan, for his part, did a poor job responding to Davis’ question. His based response was to contact our congressman & president since most of the funds used were federal funds. Pressed further McMillan gave the standard alderman response of you don’t live in my ward so I don’t have to answer to you. Nothing infuriates me than the your are not in my ward so I don’t care attitude. If McMillan wants to be elected License Collector this year he is going to have to be more open to valid questions about expenditures from the public, regardless of jurisdiction.

– Steve

Convention Plaza, A 60 Foot Wide Street to Nowhere

Before delving into the street known as Convention Plaza I need to give you some background…

Grand Opening festivities for St. Louis’ new Cervantes Convention Center, named after former mayor Alphonso J. Cervantes, were held in July 1977. The original facility, costing $34 million, was much smaller than the one we have today. Eight and Martin Luther King Drive were closed to create a contiguous four block area bounded by Cole on the north, 7th on the east, 9th on west and Delmar on the south. Delmar between Broadway and 14th Street was renamed Convention Plaza to reflect its new role as the entry to the Cervantes Convention Center.

Six years later the city was ready to consider an expansion of the facility and in July 1989 ground was broken on the expansion to the south. This expansion required the closing of two blocks of Convention Plaza and Lucas Avenue. In May 1993 the south expansion was complete the complex was renamed America’s Center. The expanded facility now fronted on Washington Avenue as we see it today. Combined with the Edward Jones Dome (formerly TWA dome) the entire complex now occupies 12 city blocks.

For nearly 17 years now Convention Plaza, the once busy street in front of the convention center, has been a road to nowhere. For all these years the street heads east toward the blank side of America’s Center.

The photo at right shows Convention Plaza between 9th & 11th Streets. The vertical street in the center is 10th Street while the big object on the far right is the convention center.

Convention Plaza is wide —- 60 feet from curb to curb. It includes four driving lanes plus a center turn lane. No parking is permitted on the street. This is a lot of potential volume for a street that doesn’t do much or go anywhere to speak of.

10th Street is one-way heading south and 11th is one-way heading north. 9th is one-way northbound from Convention Plaza north and two-way south of Convention Plaza. Here is a Google Map of the area.

None of the buildings adjacent to the street have entrances facing Convention Plaza. To the west the old Globe-Democrat building has loading docks and parking garage entrances. All in all this three block section looks pretty dismal.

By contrast 10th Street (one-way southbound) is a mere 30 feet wide curb to curb between the two big surface parking lots. Here the street has one row of on-street parking and two travel lanes. 10th Street’s two travel lane receive traffic from I-70 into downtown while Convention Plaza gets the occasional car by comparison.

Oddly this area, part of the 7th Ward,
wasn’t included in the recent Downtown Access, Circulation and Traffic Study. An area left behind.

Ideally I’d like to see new construction on the blocks where we now have all the unsightly surface parking. This could create new uses for Convention Plaza.

In the meantime the city should be allowing parking on this unnecessarily wide street. We are losing money by not having parking meters in this area. We are not getting all the revenue we should plus it makes an area two short blocks from our emerging Washington Avenue look desolate.

And while we are at it we should the name of these five blocks (9th to 14th) back to Delmar.

– Steve