Madison County Transit Offers Free Rides, $10 Youth Summer Pass

The folks over at Madison County Transit (MCT) are trying to entice people to ride transit by offering free rides, a try it before you buy it sort of program.  From the press release:

With warm weather fast approaching, Madison County Transit (MCT) is gearing up for its annual Summer Youth Pass program by inviting Madison County youth and their parents to a free ride on a MCT bus from five separate locations throughout the county. These events, which will officially kick-off the Summer Youth Pass season will take place on Saturday May 5 and Saturday May 12:

• Edwardsville Station: May 5, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.
• Wood River Station: May 5, 2007 at 11:30 a.m.
• Collinsville Station: May 12, 2007 at 9:00 a.m.
• Granite City Station: May 12, 2007 at 11:00 a.m.
• Alton Square: May 12, 2007 at 1:00 p.m.

Seems like an interesting way to get more riders.  MCT is a bus-only system servicing cities in Madison County and connecting into East St. Louis and Downtown St. Louis.  For more detail see the full press release.

Biondi & Lay Board To Take Over SLU Student Newspaper (Updated)

Not content running the athletics program at Saint Louis University, Fr Biondi seems to want to get more involved in the student newspaper. It is not uncommon for a university President to dislike the student newspaper as often they may not back the administration fully. The point of journalism, even on a university campus, is to present all sides of an issue — even those counter to administrators.
Basically the university wants to change the charter so they control the editorial advisory board, and hence the viewpoint of the paper. As lessons go, this might be good for the students in this day of corporate media conglomerates.

I received the following, written by someone close to the situation:

Today, April 30, the Editorial Board of the University News and the current and newly-elected presidents of the Student Government Association met with the Vice President of Student Development Kent Porterfield and Provost Joe Weixlmann. (Dr. Avis Meyer, the “unofficial adviser” of the U.News and my attorney Tim E. Hogan were asked to leave before the meeting began, or Weixlmann refused to conduct the meeting. They waited outside). The aforementioned students were then given two options:

1. That the students who want to write for an independent U.News would be allowed to do so, possibly under a different name that would be located off-campus, and would not be supported financially by the University. Existing debts to the University would have to be paid in full, and any monies in the current University News account would be subject to “a conversation” as to whether or not they would be given to this independent entity. There would be “some distribution rights on-campus.” It was not clear as to whether or not there would be a future for this independent paper after current members of the Editorial Board graduate.

2. Should the students choose to be involved in a “University-sponsored” publication, operated on behalf of the University, those students and that paper would operate under a new charter. The charter, for all intents and purposes, is similar to the current charter, in that the paper would be semi-independent, and the administration is responsible for appointing an adviser, and members to the advisory board. This paper can adopt its own constitution and bylaws, and is expected to uphold the “Jesuit Catholic” mission statement of the University. The Board of Trustees will no longer hold the charter; and will not have to vote on any changes to the organization. The charter creates a new position of a Student Media Coordinator, who oversees the Newspaper Production Adviser (the latter of which will be selected with “input” from the editorial staff, the advisory board, the VP of Student Development, and the Student Media Coordinator). The advisory board become strictly advisory in nature, and no longer has the ability to vote on anything affecting the U.News. The caveat? The Editorial Board and the Editor in Chief will be nominated by the Advisory Board to the VP of Student Development, and the VP will either approve the nomination or request another recommendation be submitted. The VP of Student Development can also dismiss or suspend any student editor for “misconduct or failure to perform their responsibilites adequately.” In essence, the entire editorial staff of the paper will be University employees, at the whim of the VP of Student Development.

The Ed Board asked may questions, and the gist of the conversation was this: The students must individually choose which publication they would rather work for, and report back before the end of the University’s fiscal year which is June 30th. Regardless, the Board of Trustees will vote to rescind the current charter of the University News and then this new charter will be held and upheld ONLY by the Office of Student Development. While the new charter stresses the independance of the paper, the hiring and firing of the editors makes the paper beholden to the University, and will instill great fear in the hearts of the students.

As a SLU student I fully support a paper which remains free of interference from the administration. Otherwise, you simply have a paper that is nothing but a fluff PR piece. The university puts out enough fluff already either through their own means or publications like the St. Louis Business Journal (one sided pieces on the arena tax issue). This is a simply power grab and an attempt to squash independent thought.

The Alumni from U. News are organizing in protest, I received a copy of this email:

Fellow U. News alumni,

On Monday afternoon the student editors of the University News were summoned to a meeting with Provost Joe Weixlmann and VP-Student Development Kent Porterfield. At the meeting, which Avis Meyer was not allowed to attend the meeting, the students were presented with a new charter for the paper that would be put before the university trustees this week.

As most of you know, the newspaper’s independence from administrative interference is guaranteed in the existing charter. The proposed charter, however, would allow university administrators to wield an unbelievable amount of control over the student press.

For instance, any candidates for editor positions would have to be approved first by an advisory board appointed by the university, and then the presumptive editor would have to be approved by the VP for Student Development before taking the position. And those editors, if they upset the university through the paper’s news coverage or editorial positions, could be removed at will by the university.

Also, the university will solely be in charge of selecting the advisor, and have a strong suspicion that Avis Meyer will not be SLU’s preferred choice.

Most troubling, especially for an institution of higher learning, it looks like SLU will not allow the student editors or anyone else to be present during the trustee’s deliberations to argue in favor of the existing charter.

The trustees’ executive committee will vote on the proposal on Thursday. I’m not sure if this would require a vote of the full board, but if it does that would happen on Friday.

Diana Benanti, the very capable editor of the paper, has asked for the alumni to help out and raise hell. Here’s what you can do:

1. Pass this email on to all the folks that I have forgotten. [Or pass this post along to others]

2. Call SLU. Here are the relevant numbers – VP-Student Development Kent Porterfield (314-977-2226); Provost Joe Weixlmann (314-977-3718); the Rev. President Lawrence Biondi (314-977-7777). [Link to SLU Administration page]

3. Contact the trustees. I don’t have numbers, but if you know any of these folks or do business with them, call them. Hopefully some enterprising you U Newsers will supply us old cranks with some phone numbers for these pezzonovanti.

Mr. Barry H. Beracha, Chairman
Ms. Robin Smith, Vice Chair
Mr. J. Joseph Adorjan
Mr. John S. Alberici
Rev. Andy Alexander, S.J.
Mr. Richard D. Baron
Rev. Lawrence Biondi, S.J.
Mr. William A. Blase, Jr.
Mr. Oliver C. Boileau
Mr. Thomas H. Brouster
Rev. Richard O. Buhler, S.J.
Rev. James J. Burshek, S.J.
Mr. Robert G. Clark
Mr. Larry Cockell
Mr. John M. Cook
Mr. Gerald E. Daniels
J. Daniel Daly, S.J.
Mr. Charles L. Drury, Sr.
Mr. Thomas P. Dunne, Sr.
Mr. L. B. Eckelkamp, Jr.
Mr. Robert N. Fox
Dr. Eva L. Frazer
Mr. Shaun R. Hayes
Mr. Joseph Imbs, III
Rev. James G. Knapp, S.J.
Mr. Al Litteken
Mrs. Mary V. Longrais
Mr. Paul G. Lorenzini
Rev. Keith F. Muccino, S.J.
Rev. Robert L. Niehoff, S.J.
Mr. Tony Novelly
Dr. Francis O’Donnell, Jr.
Mr. Michael D. O’Keefe
Mr. G. Keith Phoenix
Mr. John K. Pruellage
Mr. Daniel A. Rodrigues
Mr. W. Michael Ross
Mr. James A. Saitz
Mr. Rex A. Sinquefield
Mr. Patrick J. Sly
Mr. James T. Smith
Ms. Martha S. Uhlhorn
Daniel P. White, S.J.

4. Send a letter to editor to the U. News for this week’s edition. And do it quickly as they’re going to be plenty busy this week dealing with this, putting out a paper and getting ready for the approaching final exams.

I ask that all SLU students and alumni contact the univeristy administration immediately to speak out against this injustice. Not an alumni? That is OK, let them know you are member of the community and you want free press to continue on campus. Better yet, tell them you won’t buy a ticket to an event at the new arena if the university siezes control of the student paper.

UPDATE 5/2/2007 @ 8:30pm:

The St. Louis Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, of which I am a board member, has issued a statement on this issue. Click here to read what area journalists think of this controversy.

Bulk of City Legislation is Development Related

The new session of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen is just beginning and already they have introduced bills numbered 2-65.  Of these, I counted roughly 45 that were development related — either redevelopment plans, TIF financing, PUDs (Planning Unit Developments) or related.  Thus, so far, roughly 70% of the legislation is development related (45 bills).

Of couse, if one alderman introduces a bill for a development (or redevelopment) in their ward the other 27 go along under their unwritten rule of “aldermanic courtesy.” Basically, the 28 aldermen get to do what they want within their ward with no legislative oversight.  It is doubtful the city’s planning & urban design office has reviewed any of the projects.  Mayor Slay keeps planning director Rollin Stanley and his staff hidden over at 1015 Locust, pulling them out only when used to talk about census numbers and such.

Here is an example of the “summary” of one such bill:

Board Bill#:      18
Title:      Redevelopment Plan for 2652 Ann
Summary:      An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 2652 Ann Ave. Area (“Area”) after finding that the Area is blighted as defined in Section 99.320 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, 2000, as amended, (the “Statute” being Sections 99.300 to 99.715 inclusive), containing a description of the boundaries of said Area in the City of St. Louis (“City”), attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A”, finding that redevelopment and rehabilitation of the Area is in the interest of the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the people of the City; approving the Plan dated March 27, 2007 for the Area (“Plan”), incorporated herein by attached Exhibit “B”, pursuant to Section 99.430; finding that there is a feasible financial plan for the development of the Area which affords maximum opportunity for development of the Area by private enterprise; finding that no property in the Area may be acquired by the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Louis (“LCRA”) through the exercise of eminent domain; finding that the property within the Area is unoccupied, but if it should become occupied the Redeveloper shall be responsible for relocating any eligible occupants displaced as a result of implementation of the Plan; finding that financial aid may be necessary to enable the Area to be redeveloped in accordance with the Plan; finding that there shall be available five (5) year real estate tax abatement; and pledging cooperation of the Board of Aldermen and requesting various officials, departments, boards and agencies of the City to cooperate and to exercise their respective powers in a manner consistent with the Plan
Sponsor:       Phyllis Young

You can click here to view this summary and reach the full PDF bill.   Don’t look for Exhibit “B” online because, just as in the days of Jim Shrewsbury as President, this information still does not exist online.  Hopefully, with a bit more time, Lewis Reed’s office can begin to put all the related materials online.
Reed, during the campaign, made an issue out of not being able to get access to informtion on the board of Estimate & Apportionment, including minutes.   We’ll see what action he takes, if any, to make this hard to find information more accessible to the rest of us now that he is one of the three on E&A (along with Mayor Slay & Comptroller Green).  It will also be interesting to see if Reeds idea of more open government will extend to basics such as including bill attachments online — something certainly within the control of the President of the city’s legislative body.
These redevelopment bills read almost identical to each other.  It makes me wonder how much thought is actually put into each project and by whom?  A staff person at the St. Louis Development Corporation?  Under what guidelines, our 1947 anti-city zoning code?   My guess is the developer says what they want to do, the alderman directs staff to make it happen and it just does.  No scrutiny, no checking against a master plan.  Certainly no critical review for pedestrian access and other signs of greater public good when tax money is being involved.  Just routine business.

We are talking about legislators whose backgrounds are as business persons, accountants and such.  When reviewing the city budget they may be very helpful but with the bulk of their legislation in the development arena I get a bit uneasy.
You can view all the current Board Bills here.

“Small Architectural Interventions in Troubled Neighborhoods”

I got word of a potentially interesting presentation this evening at Wash U:

On Monday, April 30, at 7 p.m., John Kleinschmidt will present a talk on small architectural interventions in troubled neighborhoods in Kemp Auditorium (Room 116) in Givens Hall at Washington U.

John is a third year student in the College of Architecture and worked on this study as an independent project. He concentrated on Old North St. Louis’s 14th Street Mall, on a proposed infill project on North Union and on a WU/AIA proposal for a farmer’s market in the Ville neighborhood.

Givens Hall is the main architecture school building at Wash U. I don’t know the visitor parking situation but they do have some usually full bike racks near the building entrance. The new Skinker MetroLink stop is a short distance away if you wish to take light rail. Bus is also an option but I don’t know the route numbers.

At one time in architecture, engineering, and planning schools the thought was you needed major projects to completely remake “troubled neighborhoods.” I think this mindset is still rattling around at city hall. Many, these days, are focusing on smaller solutions. Can we come in and seek out problems and come up with a series of smaller, easier to implement solutions, that can help communities without disrupting what works? I think if we are going to succeed in helping some areas the answer needs to be “yes.” The one size fits all new subdivision or strip center solutions are simply not realistic or even necessary everywhere.

UPDATE 5/1/07 @ 9:45am:

I attended the interesting event last night.  It was not exactly as I had expected.  The speaker did not offer any new ideas but was sharing thoughts from an architectural writing class about efforts in three areas, Union @ Labadie, The Ville and 14th street. The course is being taught by former Post-Dispatch critic Bob Duffy.

Cities Chasing Retail

The April 2007 issue of Governing magazine has an interesting cover story called, The Retail Chase with a subitlte: Cities will do almost anything to land the story of their dreams. From the article:

Much of the change in the retail market is happening not just within cities but in the middle of downtown. All over the country, young professionals and empty nesters — people with disposable income to spare — are moving into new lofts and high-rise condos. Those new residents have to shop somewhere. In downtown Minneapolis, now home to 30,000 people, three grocery stores are coming, and not one of them requested government subsidies. “For years, all the cities in the Midwest wanted to have a Michigan Avenue,” says Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, referring to Chicago’s famous high-end shopping street. “Michigan Avenue is spectacular, but we’re not all going to have a Michigan Avenue.” What’s evolving downtown now, in Rybak’s view, is a hybrid retail model where destination shoppers can still buy $200 shoes, but where the people living upstairs can find a dry cleaner. “Focus on the housing first,” Rybak says, “and the retail will follow.”

The above is valid, we don’t buy expensive shoes everyday (I never do). What we do need are groceries, toiletries, prescriptions, basic clothing and dry cleaners. A number of these are available in downtown St. Louis currently. But really, every neighborhood needs to have these in close proximity (… a short walk).

The online version of the issue also has some additional interviews with retail experts. One of the three is Robert Gibbs. As it turns out, Gibbs was in town recently as the retail consultant to DPZ on the Dardenne Prairie town center charette. He was certainly interesting to talk to and he did a great job communicating retail strategy to the general public. One of the things he stressed was having high design standards, explaining that retailers have several store models and will simply do the least they can get away with in the community. Retailers, much like home owners, don’t want to overbuild for the area. Gibbs indicated high standards for store fronts and lighting were very important. From one of the online-only articles:

It’s generally agreed now that the underserved markets are urban markets. From inner cities with low-income populations to high-end wealthy cities, urban centers are vastly under-retailed for lots of reasons. If you’re a retailer and you’re growing your stores, you have to figure out how to get into urban locations. To do that retailers are doing things they never would have considered five years ago. They’re modifying their old standards for store sizes in order to fit on smaller, more compact sites. They’re lowering their parking standards. They’re even changing the merchandising mix to fit the urban consumer. So there’s a tremendous opportunity for cities to attract retail.

You mean, we don’t just have to accept the type of store the retailer builds in the exurbs? The city of St. Louis is underserved from a retail perspective. We can have our cake and eat it too: higher design standards and still attract retailers seeking a market in which to grow their business.

Cities don’t have to turn themselves into a mall, but they do have to do what shoppers want. Last year 70 percent of all sales occurred after 5:30 at night. If downtown is going to compete, it has to have stores open in the evenings or on Saturdays. It has to offer the goods that people want to buy at the prices people want to pay. Last year only 2 percent of all apparel sales occurred in downtowns. In that 1950s, that’d be more like 90 to 95 percent. Downtowns have lost almost all their market share. Most are either entertainment districts or they sell knick-knacks and antiques and other things we don’t need.

Yes, evening hours are harder on the mom & pop stores but if that is when the public has time to shop that is when you need to be open for business. This is not the 1950s anymore, mom works to help the family get by so she is not out at 2pm shopping. Despite being gay, I do not go antiquing.

Cities should have a master plan to show how they can accommodate modern retail. Cities should have a written policy saying they want to be competitive and gain market share. Cities need to have high design standards for signage, lighting and building design and be willing to enforce those standards. And they have to have a public parking strategy.

Are you folks down at City Hall and the downtown partnership getting this? A plan, a policy and “high design standards” that are actually enforced! And by “parking strategy” I don’t think Gibbs is advocating the razing of historic structures for additional parking garages, he is referring to good parking management. Gibbs continues:

Cities can get back up to 30, 40 or 50 percent of market share with a policy. There’s a demand for retailers. A lot of them want to locate in downtowns. A lot of cities don’t know that.

The eight or ten cities we consult in have this huge unmet demand. Even a blue-collar town with modest income has a big demand for shoes and apparel. Urban consumers drive farther than normal to get goods and services, and the goods and services they do get downtown they overpay for. That’s the norm. Old Navy knows that now. Target knows that.

Gibbs give a good reason why we can demand higher standards:

Time matters for retailers. Stores have to open to keep their stock prices rising. A development director for a chain is told to open five stores in a region by a certain date, and if they don’t open he gets fired. So those people will go to a city only if the city can give them some assurance that the store can open by a certain date. That’s hard to do.

With good zoning & urban design codes we, as a city & region, can demand better retail design. It will not be offered to us on a silver platter, we must ask for it — no — we must demand better. The chain’s development director, faced with termination for not opening enough stores, will work with us and reluctantly pull off the shelf one of the more urban formats used in other cities. Walgreen’s will not abandon the City of St. Louis. They are on a mission to be in every part of every city and state. They are also trying to beat CVS in the race to tap new markets. QuikTrip is in a similar situation.
Wall Street doesn’t give a damn about St. Louis or if a new store is urban or has a big parking lot in front. Their concern is new growth as evidenced by new stores and eventually, steady or growing same store sales. Period. All these national retailers want to make sure they please their shareholders and Wall Street. They build the very least they can get away with and still please investment analysts that track their stock. If a reasonable urban design code requires good sidewalk access, bike parking, and caps the auto parking then the retailer will go along — that is much easier than answering to shareholders when the stock takes a dive.

Part of the problem is that retailers generally don’t build their own buildings. They work with developers, often local developers, to construct & own the facility and lease it back to them. In the St. Louis region we have a limited number of such retail developers like THF, Koman Properties, and DESCO. These developers, through campaign contributions throughout the region (Missouri & Illinois) keep things favorable to themselves. High design standards? Not for them! They will cite retailers demands but we know that really isn’t true. If they want to stay in business they will need to comply with the community’s design standards. Do you think THF included all the trees in the Chesterfield Flood Commons project out of some altruistic reason? No way! Chesterfield has high landscaping standards. With enforced design standards in place a developer can go back to a retailer and say, “our hands are tied, [insert municiapity] requires that you [insert requirement].

In addition to some basic demands, non-financial incentives can be used. For example, parking can be reduced if the developer includes bike parking (up to a point, and distributing the bike parking throughout the development). Many cities use creative incentives to improve design by giving developers choices that will make the project look & function better and not really add to the overall costs.

It is time for St. Louis to stop acting like a city losing thousands of people every decade. We are on the upswing per the latest figures from the census.