KWMU Reports on Land Assembly Tax Credit and the ‘Blairmont’ Scheme

Most of you have heard the deal by now, a huge tax credit for developers doing projects of 75 acres or more in North St. Louis.  That is the plan passed by the Missouri legislature and awaiting Governor Blunt’s signature.  But 75 acres is just massive.  For comparison sake, the old Pruitt-Igoe housing site was only 57 acres (source). From KWMU:

Missouri’s historic tax credit program has done wonders for the city of St. Louis. It allowed big developers to turn old downtown warehouses into lofts. It’s also helped individual rehabbers fix up houses that have seen better days.

But a new tax credit plan that Missouri lawmakers sent to Governor Matt Blunt this spring gives developers major incentives to buy up large tracts of city land.

Someone is already doing that on the near north side, and many people there are worried about the future of their homes.

Click here for the story and link to the MP3 audio report from KWMU’s Matt Sepic.  Sepic indicates that he had scheduled to interview developer Paul McKee but that McKee canceled.  Nice huh?

I’m personally not opposed to a tax break for developers on some larger projects.  I have issues with the minimum size.  Yes, a single home lot at a time will take longer than we have to revitalize the north side.  But 75 acres at a minimum?  St. Louis is blessed with a very nice street grid of very reasonable sized blocks.  Why not have the minimum be more along the lines of 4-6 city blocks, still a decent sized project.  Why is it we must always go for the gigantic silver bullet solution in this town?

Jane Jacobs calls this “cataclysmic money.”  From Chapter 16 of the Death and Life of Great American Cities:

Money has its limitations.  It cannot buy inherent success for cities where the conditions for inherent success are lacking and where the use of the money fails to supply them.  Furthermore, money can only do ultimate harm where it destroys the conditions needed for inherent success.  On the other hand, by helping to supply the requirements needed, money can help build inherent success in cities.  Indeed, it is indispensible.

So far the state has not required anything that will ensure these 75+ acre projects have any qualities for success.  The city, with its 1947 suburban zoning code, will almost ensure failure without massive variances.  Developer McKee and Mayor Slay are remaining quite on their intentions and unfortunately will likely try to avoid public or professional input into the overall plan.  My fear is the end result will be a huge “investment” but a long-term failure.  At this point I have no edvidence to suggest otherwise.

Fox2 To Feature Story on Marti Frumhoff

A note from Marti’s sister Lisa:

Just wanted to let you know so everyone you reach will know. Channel 2 will have a story about Marti Frumhoff
sometime between 5:00-6:30pm tonight and probably between the half hour of 5:30-6:00.

There is also a chance they may show a smaller portion of the feature story on their later news coverage.

Lowe’s & Schnuck’s Customer Using Mobility Scooter Forced to Use Street; Center Lacks ADA Access

I’ve been harping for nearly a year now about the lack of ADA access for customers of the city’s newest big box shopping center, Loughborough Commons.  Despite $14 million in tax incentives, not all are able to easily access the two stores that opened last year, Schnuck’s and Lowe’s.

Yesterday I spotted a person leaving Loughborough Commons by the secondary entrance along Grand.  He had made purchases as I could see shopping bags in the front and back of his mobility scooter.  The center has only two ways in —- one on Loughborough and this one off Grand.  An ADA compliant route from either public street (and to either store) has not been provided.

Above this customer is using the wide auto drive which is also used by delivery trucks.

The customer then heads northbound on the public street.  Loughborough Commons developer DESCO did not provide a public sidewalk along Grand despite a wide public right of way.  This puts people most vulnerable at risk.  Alderman Villa, when approving this project, could have likely required a public sidewalk within the public right of way.

I was expecting the customer on his mobility scooter to turn on one of the many streets that Loughborough Commons turns it back to.  Instead, he continued north on Grand toward Loughborouh.  You might ask, why didn’t he make it over to the sidewalk on the left (west) side of the street?  Well, it is not ADA compliant as not all corners have ramps.  A sidewalk along the east side of Grand would have added very little to the overall budget of the project which again received $14 million in public tax breaks.

The customer turned left onto Loughorough Ave, a very busy street!  Above you can see him just ahead of the westbound red pickup.  Due to the high volume of traffic I was unable to get across the street to get better photos as the man on the scooter approached the rear of a parked van.  It was nerve racking watching him pass this parked vehicle on such a busy road.

The man then continued on westbound Loughborough and turned right into Carondelet Park (look closely and you can see  him at the entrance).  You may look at this image and wonder why he is not on the sidewalk shown at right.  That would be a good question.  Remember, sidewalks in St. Louis are only for show — not for actual users.  This man had no way, from Grand, to get onto this sidewalk which would have put him out of harms way on a very busy street.

The man entered the park, most likely cutting through to get home. He continued on this road for a bit until he caught up with the internal path system where he continued west-northwest.  The nice sidewalk seen in the last picture does not continue into the park.

How is it that a new from scratch $40+ million project with $14 million of that in public tax subsidies can fail to accommodate real users?  Answer, lack of priority.  Ald. Villa will remind us that the center is not finished even though the two stores opened last year.  The large site has only two entrances and, given the grades of the main entrance, neither will meet the federal ADA requirements even when finished per their plans submitted to the city.

Yes, the new grocery store is cleaner than the old one and hey we are getting a Breadco (Panera to folks outside St. Louis) and a Starbucks soon.  Do these things make up for the fact we’ve failed to ensure that people such as this man can travel safely to the store?  I don’t think so.

I hope nothing happens to this man or anyone else traveling by foot, wheelchair or mobility scooter and headed to Loughborough Commons.  But, I’m putting the City of St. Louis, DESCO, Schnuck’s and Lowe’s (and soon Panera, Starbucks, etc…) on notice that Loughborough Commons fails to meet the needs of the community and to meet the requirements set forth by federal civil rights legislation, the Americans with Disabilities Act.  If some unfortunate accident happens, I will help to make sure you are all held liable.

Saint Louis University (SLU) to Raze Historic Building to Construct Fake Historic Building

Saint Louis University has announced plans to renovate and expand the law school building.

Saint Louis University President Lawrence Biondi, S.J., has announced that a fundraising initiative to expand and renovate the School of Law is beginning. The initiative will fund the construction of a new classroom building and large-scale renovation of the current facilities. The University’s Board of Trustees gave its approval to start fundraising for the project at its May meeting.

How much fundraising? How about $35 million? I can see why SLU needed $8 million in public tax incentives to build their new arena, it would make fundraising just that much harder. The only other thing standing in the way are two old buildings along Lindell Blvd.

Demolition of this older building with a newer facade (1940s?) is being razed despite being a viable structure. I guess it is part of the Jesuit tradition to be wasteful with resources?

This former mansion will also meet the wrecking ball. This part of St. Louis once had many fine homes but over the years they’ve pretty much all been razed. This one had been used by the university for some years.

This beautiful home will not be razed, just surrounded by the new building. Here in St. Louis we have a long standing tradition of saving only the best structures (aka Landmarks) and destroying every bit of context around it. The home in the background and shown in the prior picture, on most streets, would be one of the finest buildings and considered safe from demolition. Sitting next door to this more elaborate home, it is considered disposible.

This is a really long block and the separate buildings help create a nice rhythm. The new building will destroy this wonderful rhythm of structures. It will also attempt to give a false sense of history by the use of gothic architecture:

The project will completely reconfigure the appearance and functioning of the current law school facility. Special features will include a new state-of-the-art classroom building, a stately courtroom, a grand commons, a modernized legal information center and an exterior facade in the classic Gothic style.

Below is SLU’s artist rendering of the final results.

Some may look at the above sketch and think it is an improvement over the current law school, below:

I’d be hard pressed to convincingly argue this beige box is architecturally better than the thin veneer of gothic that will be applied to it like wall paint from Bella & Birch. In 2007 are these our only architectural choices? I’m guessing someone did a study showing that universities like SLU and nearby Washington University can east-coast old school tuition if the campus buildings look like old school east-coast campuses.

The stunning old historic mansion will be surrounded by nothing but pretent gothic. Classic…

Cardinals Parking by Permit Only

Last night I was scootering home along 8th street (one-way south) during the baseball game. As you may have seen before, people park along 8th between Walnut and Clark. They also park along the curved part of 7th — both areas adjacent to the Bowling Hall of Fame. The signs indicate permit parking only. Permit parking only?

I asked one of the police officers working the area what it took to get a permit, he was unsure. Is it city officials parking in these spaces? Or friends of the Cardinals? Who issues the permits and how long are they valid? What is the cost of a permit and can just anyone buy one? Where will these people park once the Ballpark Village is under way and complete? Does the city get any revenue from this parking on the public street? Who pays for the police to make sure those who park there have valid permits?

I’m long on questions and short on answers.