Roddy Ready to Hand Over 12 Acres to St. Louis’ Largest Employer

As most everyone knows, BJC Hospital is seeking control of 12 acres of Forest Park located East of Kingshway. Many are content letting BJC lease this land through 2096 in exchange for roughly $2 million a year to help offset maintenance costs in Forest Park. Currently maintenance costs are in the $4 million per year range.

I attended the meeting last night conducted by Alderman Joe Roddy and, as you might expect, have some opinions.

Current Lease

BJC has had a lease on 9 of the 12 acres since 1973 when they constructed an underground parking garage. The current lease payments are only $150,000/year according to the St. Louis Business Journal. Under the 1973 lease, which expires in 2050, BJC is responsible for maintaining the 9 acres of parkland and does not allow them to construct any buildings on the site.

While much of the park looks great the Hudlin Tennis Courts are in poor repair with the exception of two courts that were resurfaced last year. See park photos on Flickr.

Park Usage

At 7pm last night I saw about 25 people in the park. Some were playing racquetball & tennis, one woman was just sitting along on a bench reading a book while several families were at the playground. I asked Ald. Roddy if a usage study had been conducted on the park and he said he was not aware of any. When I parked on Clayton Road last night to visit the park the first I thing I realized is that due to the terrain I couldn’t really tell if anyone was in the park or not. It was not until I was walking through the area that I could see people in all parts of the park.

It seems highly negligent to take away park space without first determining who uses the park, how often and at what times at the day. At the very least you want to know where the users come from so that as alternatives sites for the facilities are considered these could hopefully continue to serve the existing user base.

Clayton Road

While I have zero proof it is my suspicion that BJC’s ultimate goal is to close Clayton Road West of Euclid Ave. If done, this would create a very large parcel for them to build on. Ald. Roddy said closing Clayton Road was not part of the plan and that doing so would require amending the Forest Park Master Plan again. Pressing the issue he conceded that, in the future, that was entirely possible.

Closing Clayton Road would give BJC about 13 acres (assuming 1 acre for the current road right-of-way) in this area. I can just hear it now, “In looking at our logistical needs to serve our patients we’ve determined we need to close Clayton Road.” Then I can hear Ald. Roddy like he did last night, “BJC is the area’s largest employer.” Translation: what BJC wants, BJC gets.

If this goes forward I’d like to see language that prevents the closing of Clayton Road during the duration of the lease. Ironclad off the table language that a lawyer can’t get around in the future.

The Money

Wow, BJC to cover nearly half of the maintenance of Forest Park. Sounds like a good deal. But what will the maintenance costs be in 20 years? Or fifty years? Ninety years is a very long commitment. Citizens of St. Louis that are not even born yet will have to deal with the end of this lease. Does it renew automatically? I say the lease payments need to keep pace with inflation or the cost of park maintenance. In 2096 $2 million will probably just buy you a starter home.

The Money Part II

Through a 1/10th cent sales tax in St. Louis City, St. Louis County and St. Charles County we’ve funded the Great Rivers Greenway District to the tune of about $10 million annually:

Great Rivers Greenway work for a clean, green, connected St. Louis region. To achieve its mission, the district is developing The River Ring, an interconnected system of greenways, parks and trails. Through the creation of The River Ring, Great Rivers Greenway will provide economic, environmental and social benefits across St. Louis City, St. Louis County and St. Charles County.

Big plans are underway to create the Chouteau Greenway project that will connect Forest Park to the riverfront. With $10 million annually you’ve got to get it spent right? So, the City of St. Louis is struggling to maintain its existing park lands and we are looking to create more green space we can’t afford to maintain? Someone please tell me the fiscal logic in all this.

The Process

Ald. Roddy said that BJC’s lawyers have been working on this for about a year. We get weeks to react. You may have read that the Forest Park Southeast Development Corporation, partially funded by BJC, had a letter of support for BJC taking this land for development. Well, it turns out that isn’t exactly true. Forest Park Forever and BJC asked FPSEDC Executive Director Irving Blue penned the letter of support without the consent of the organization’s board of directors. Neighborhood residents at the meeting were visibly and vocally upset.

Blue’s answer was that he had to respond quickly and did not have a board meeting scheduled until next month. How very convenient. Also convenient was the fact Ald. Roddy didn’t bring any of the drawings or maps of the area due to the short notice. I’ve been to enough of these meetings now that I think the Board of Aldermen have a secret manual on manipulating citizens on done deals. It might go something like this:

Step 1 – Never bring any documentation to a meeting since you don’t want them to actually know anything concrete about the project.

Step 2 – Apologize at length about not having materials. Good reasons for not having them are coming from another meeting, they are still being finished for a future meeting, or it was just short notice you didn’t get them together.

Step 3 – Let them have their say. Be sure to listen and nod. Go along with what they say but offer a counterpoint that supports the deal. Never, under any circumstances, let them know the deal is done and their input doesn’t really matter to the final outcome. See Step 4 for more help in this direction.

Step 4 – Since the basic deal is already done your job at this point is to act important and go to bat for your constituents by “leveraging” the deal. Get them to make a list of trivial concessions that won’t blow the done deal. Don’t promise anything but that you’ll do your best for the ward. Make it sound difficult even though you know this is easy since this low-hanging fruit stuff has already been assumed as part of the PR strategy.

Step 5 – If anyone brings up valid reasons why the deal can’t or shouldn’t be done go back to things like it is hard to tell the Mayor and others no at this point in the process or mention how important they are to the city. Make sure the individual citizen feels small relative to the project.

Next Steps

The Forest Park Advisory Board is meeting next Thursday afternoon at the History Museum at 4:30pm to consider amending the Forest Park Master Plan. I’m not certain if public input will be taken. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on amendments to the Forest Park Master Plan as well as the City’s Strategic Land Use Plan. The hearing, where the public may offer input, will be May 3, 2006 at 5:30pm in room 208 of City Hall (see public notice).

What I’d Like To See Happen

The lawyers have had a year to get everything in place and now it is rush, rush rush. While I’d prefer the city to tell BJC a big firm “NO” I’m willing to give this some serious thought. Say about a year? I want BJC to fund an independent usage study of the park space so that we all know how and when his park area is being used. The Forest Park Advisory Board and the Planning Commission need to tell BJC, “we’ll let you know.”

– Steve

Forest Park SE Dev. Corp. To Hold Meeting on Forest Park Land Run

Not surprising, an organization that relies on both the area Alderman and BJC has backed the plan to let BJC build on part of Forest Park. Now they are holding a public meeting to give the appearance of seeking public input:

On Thursday, April 13th at 6:00 pm at Adams Park Community Center, 4317 Vista, residents/concerned citizens will have an opportunity to hear and discuss the proposed relocation of the Hudlin Park, portion of Forest Park, east of Kingshighway. The park is located at Clayton Road and Euclid Avenue. The proposed reuse involves expansion of the BJC/Barnes-Jewish Hospital to this site. In turn, Forest Park will receive an annual gift from BJC/Barnes- Jewish Hospital.

Forest Park Southeast Development Corporation submitted a support letter for this proposal – acknowledging that the proposed development would in turn be good for Forest Park, the City of St. Louis, and BJC/Barnes-Jewish Hospital.

Attending this meeting will be Alderman Joseph Roddy and other concerned residents/business owners of Forest Park Southeast. Your input is welcomed. Again, the meeting is scheduled for Thursday, April 13th at 6:00 pm.

Please forward to others.

Irving M. Blue, Executive Director
Forest Park Southeast Development Corporation

I just love how all this works:

1) Hatch evil plan around self interests but tied concerns about higher taxes if not accepted.
2) Get politicos on board with plan. After all, that is why we give them contributions!
3) Get local group on board now that they are used to our annual grants.
4) Oh yeah, almost forgot, hold some sort of public meeting now that all the decisions are made. Solicit “input” without laughing.
5) Wrap up song & dance and return to doing whatever we feel like secure in the knowledge the alderman and neighborhood are eating out of our hands.

What a system we’ve got.

The show begins at 6pm on 4/13/06 at 4317 Vista.

– Steve

BJC Hospital, Forest Park & ‘Aldermanic Courtesy’

The Post-Dispatch has a front page story about the city considering giving BJC Hospital a 90-year lease on a 12-acre parcel of Forest Park that is located East of Kingshighway.

If signed, the deal would give the hospital rights to the land for the next 90 years for an annual payment of more than $2 million, money the city says would go into a park trust. The hospital would have to pay to replace the courts, but not necessarily in Forest Park – it could put them anywhere in the city.

$180 million over 90 years. Certainly nothing to sneeze at.

Handing over a such a large piece of land to the hospital would be an unprecedented step in the 130-year history of Forest Park, a regional gem that is among the nation’s largest urban parks.

Well, not exactly. Lest we forget that thing called Highway 40/I-64 that took a massive chuck of Forest Park on at least two occasions. Our velodrome, located in a hard to reach corner of Penrose Park, was previously located in Forest Park but was relocated for highway expansion. But concerns are still valid that if BJC can build on Forest Park land what is to stop other ares from the same.

The bigger picture is the Parks Department is seeking funds to help their budget. Might they consider getting rid of some smaller parks altogether? Once they get a taste of money from this lease will they seek additional leases? Or perhaps they’ll sell sponsorships. They could rename Carondelet Park to something like Lowe’s Park at Carondelet after the new Lowe’s being constructed across the street. We’ve got some great little parks throughout the city but I have strong concerns we may see additional efforts to take these as well.

What I really want to see is how the BJC/Forest Park debate plays out in the Board of Aldermen. You see, we have this archaic practice called “Aldermanic Courtesy” whereby all the other aldermen forget they are elected as legislators and “defer” to the alderman in the ward where development is to take place. This is how Matt Villa got away with the horrible Loughborough Commons, Joe Vollmer is getting away with razing St. Aloysius and how Jennifer Florida thinks she will get away with a drive-thru restaurant where city ordinance says one cannot exist. You’ll recall that Ald. Craig Schmid got in trouble for speaking out against Florida’s drive-thru even though his ward is a literal two blocks away and he was representing the interest of his constituents.

By their own twisted logic on legislating the city the only alderman that should have any say in the matter is Joe Roddy. The parcel in question is in his ward, barely. But hey, that is the process. The other aldermen will say it is best they defer to the aldermen of the area but they know what is best. We all know this is BS but they continue to espouse it like it is gospel.

The balance of Forest Park falls within Lyda Krewson’s 28th Ward. Will Roddy become Florida in this case, advocating against public outcry, and will Krewson become Schmid, bucking the unwritten code of aldermen and actually representing the best interests of the city at large? Only time will tell.

BJC should have to make due with the land they’ve got.

– Steve

St. Louis Not Prepared for Oil Crisis

SustainLane has created a ranking of “50 Largest cities Ranked by Readiness for an Oil Crisis” (see list at right). St. Louis didn’t even make the list! My hometown of Oklahoma City, known for its massive sprawl, was ranked ahead of St. Louis at #50.

From SustainLane:

SustainLane analyzed commute trend data within major cities–how many people rode, drove, carpooled, walked, or biked to work. Then we looked at how much people rode public transit in the general metro area, and metro area road congestion. Sprawl, local food, and wireless connectivity made up our final areas of data analysis (see chart below for weighting of these criteria). The index did not take into consideration energy impacts associated with heating or electricity, which would be largely dependent on non-oil energy sources, such as coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy. Only one U.S. city in our study, Boston, uses a significant amount of heating oil. For this reason Boston, ranked #2, gets an asterisk: if heating oil usage were used as a criteria its rank would be somewhat lower.

As fuel prices continue to rise the St. Louis region will lag behind these other regions. The time to act is now.

What Can The Most Vulnerable Cities Do?
It’s not impossible for cities that are now the most vulnerable to an oil crisis to become more prepared.

One city that is taking comprehensive actions to lessen its economic and physical dependence on the automobile is Denver. Ranked #15 on our oil crisis preparedness index, Denver has bet its future on new multi-modal public transportation as part of an economic strategy known as Transit Oriented Development.

The city passed the largest regional transportation funding measure in America’s history in 2003. The measure, which was led by Mayor John Hickenlooper and regional mayors, garnered 73 percent voter approval for a $4.7 billion initiative that combines funding for multiple new light rail, commuter rail, and bus rapid transit lines. There will even be a ski train to zip adventurers into the nearby constellation of Rockies resorts.

While other regions are funding and building state of the art transportation systems we are looking at spending massive sums on rebuilding an existing highway and building a new bridge. Our priorities need to be changed. We also need a leader to help guide the region to a more sustainable model.

Full Story here. Thanks to reader Jim Zavist for the link.

UPDATE 4/11/06 @ 6:45pm
The rankings have been called into question for this study. From the methodology on their related US City Rankings we know they considered all cities with a population greater than 100,000. With the City of St. Louis in the mid-300s we would have part of the study group but simply failed to make a showing on the top 50 list. As evidence, the City of Arlington TX has a population less than the City of St. Louis but appears as #43 on the list. I’ve sent SustainLane an email asking to clarify the ranking of St. Louis.

UPDATE 4/12/06 @ 7:45am
Well, turns out I was wrong and Publiceye was correct. Warren from SustainLane added a comment below to clarify the methodology for their sustainable cities project was different than that used to rank cities for oil crisis preparedness. In short they took the top 50 cities by population figures. Arlington TX was behind St. Louis in the 2000 Census but by the 2004 update that was used they had pulled ahead. So we don’t really know where we’d rank because we are too small to be counted.

– Steve

Banners Have Gone Too Far

All over the city, especially downtown, you see banners for new condos and lofts. Long vacant buildings have massive colorful banners announcing the project and where to find more sales information. These are a great visual way to communicate that something is happening in these buildings. Visitors to our city can quickly see St. Louis is rockin. The banners, thankfully, are just temporary until the building is finished.

What about when the banner is not promoting a project but is purely advertising?

This weekend I spotted these colorful banners on the Market Street side of Mike Shannon’s new location. At first I couldn’t believe what I was seeing and had to loop back around to make sure I was seeing this correct. Yes, there in big letters was advertising for AT&T and Cingular Wireless. How tragic.

I’m not a fan of sterile streets. I like activity, color, lights and such. I’m also more inclined toward advertising for the business located in the building rather than a building owner selling their wall for advertising. I’m not a fan of vinyl banners.

A century ago we saw large sides of buildings painted with advertising, sometimes for the business in that building and sometimes not. Today those old signs are regarded as charming and actually helpful in identifying historical information. While I’m not advocating Mike Shannon’s paint advertising for AT&T on their building I do see a difference. The painting was semi-permanent and a testament to how long the business was expected to be around. Vinyl banners look cheap because they are cheap. The look temporary because they are. But how temporary?

Will Mike Shannon’s keep this banner up until AT&T changes their name again? Maybe until they find someone else that wants to sponsor their North wall? Are vinyl banners to become a common sight on buildings all over the city? I certainly hope not!

I scanned the City’s Comprehensive Sign Control Regulations but it wasn’t readily clear to me if the banner at Mike Shannon’s is in violation or not. Mike Shannon’s did an outstanding job on the renovation of the building with its large windows and attractive patio. Pity they felt it necessary to ruin the look as they have.

– Steve