how long does he have to veto it? or, when can we expect a veto/non veto from him?
- 1,320
Phyllis Young's reply to an email concerning Board Bill 2:
The Board Bill doesn't give a blanket ok for demolition of the building. They would need the review of any plans for the demolition and it's replacement approved by Cultural Resources/Planning Department. That is specified in the bill."
Does that mean we should now be e-mailing Betsy Bradley at CRO? and someone in planning/zoning?
- 11K
^ First, re-read the bill and make sure there's agreement on this issue. It's been said several places, including by me, that the bill bypasses CRO review. No one's refuted that claim that I've seen, except for the email above. It's my understanding that by declaring the buildings blighted (and absolutely ridiculous "process"), that their demolition no longer requires review by the CRO and public hearing by the Preservation Board.
The bill: http://stlouis-mo.gov/internal-apps/leg ... BB2102.pdf
The bill: http://stlouis-mo.gov/internal-apps/leg ... BB2102.pdf
- 1,320
^I had the same understanding. The bill seems designed to bypass the process.
I'm arranging a meeting with the mayor to try to enlist his support. At this point, I don't know that the developer even knows the building's history. With a little official encouragement, they may realize that the building is worth far more to them standing than demolished.
I'm arranging a meeting with the mayor to try to enlist his support. At this point, I don't know that the developer even knows the building's history. With a little official encouragement, they may realize that the building is worth far more to them standing than demolished.
- 3,235
Yeah I think we need to have a conversation with the developer. I doubt they know what's going on.
Section 99 commonly referred to in the Bill is basically a land clearance ordinance. It allows clearance/redevelopment and was common in many Urban Renewal projects in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. However it is uncertain whether this would sidestep a CRO hearing.
- 1,320
^On to the developer... or on to the developer's St. Louis lawyer?
One of those is billed at $300/hour to *not* be inspired.
One of those is billed at $300/hour to *not* be inspired.
Phyllis Young is currently listed as a member of the Preservation Board. Had not noticed that before now. Hmmm....
- 1,320
Business Journal: Mayor Slay signs bill approving Locust Street demolitions
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news ... g-for.html
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news ... g-for.html
Not a lot of reader comments on the BJ article yet...The demolition of the buildings, located near the intersection of Locust and 10th streets, must be reviewed by the city’s Cultural Resources office before proceeding to the Preservation Board for final demolition approval."
- 8,920
Makes what Jeff said recently seem like a load of crap. Do they want to save buildings or not?
Cupples complex shrinks as St. Louis struggles to keep historic buildings standing
Jeff Rainford, chief of staff to Mayor Francis Slay, said the mayor will hold an “all hands on deck” meeting on Thursday seeking ideas and possible legislation to keep a similar scenario from happening again. That could include anything from stiffer fines on developers to creating a large fund to help the city save buildings before it’s too late.
“We are pulling everybody together in city government to figure out what lessons we have learned from Cupples,” Rainford said.
.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 0w.twitter
It was a load of crap.moorlander wrote:Makes what Jeff said recently seem like a load of crap. Do they want to save buildings or not?
^Or they had the "all hands on deck" meeting and had no ideas for new legislation and realized they have learned nothing from Cupples. Pathetic. The people who run the city should know how a city works.
- 8,155
More on the Mayor signing the legislation:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2e0be.html
"Slay said on Wednesday that the aim is to keep the buildings standing, and noted that the bill requires that any demolition must be approved by the city's Cultural Resources office, in addition to the Preservation Board."
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2e0be.html
"Slay said on Wednesday that the aim is to keep the buildings standing, and noted that the bill requires that any demolition must be approved by the city's Cultural Resources office, in addition to the Preservation Board."
- 5,433
Sadly, I don't think anyone in city government- apart from the Cultural Resources Office- has a clue about the value of our built environment.wabash wrote:^Or they had the "all hands on deck" meeting and had no ideas for new legislation and realized they have learned nothing from Cupples. Pathetic. The people who run the city should know how a city works.
I know I should be looking at the glass as half-full, especially with the redevelopment of the Arcade and Chemical buildings, the new Saint Louis University School of Law, etc. And I still think there's a bright future for the Railway Exchange even though I'm crestfallen about the loss of Macy's. But I am really starting to lose faith in this city- we still have too many people in power that simply don't get it. And we're stuck with most of them for awhile as well.
Talk is cheap, Frankie Fourterms. Do you realize that our built environment is one of our top advantages or not?
Don't know if the stltoday article was updated, but I didn't see this part before.
Ward 7 Alderman Phyllis Young, who sponsored the current redevelopment bill, said the goal is to get “a row of buildings done” on Locust Street.
“Do you possibly give up one or two buildings so you can get the rest of them done?” Young asked. “Sometimes that’s the trade-off.”
- 2,936
"I've always been in favor of preserving these buildings, even before I authorized to have them destroyed!"roger wyoming II wrote:More on the Mayor signing the legislation:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2e0be.html
"Slay said on Wednesday that the aim is to keep the buildings standing, and noted that the bill requires that any demolition must be approved by the city's Cultural Resources office, in addition to the Preservation Board."
That's flip-flopping an issue AND passing the buck. Seriously, if we're going to say we want to save our historical built environment so much that there's a special fund developing to do this, then save the gawddamn built environment. Don't just pass it off to some other committee and expect them to do the job that you can do yourself, just to try to keep the blood off your hands.
She's seen too many episodes of M*A*S*H and thinks we need to operate under "triage" conditions. Straight up nuts.StL2003 wrote:Don't know if the stltoday article was updated, but I didn't see this part before.Ward 7 Alderman Phyllis Young, who sponsored the current redevelopment bill, said the goal is to get “a row of buildings done” on Locust Street.
“Do you possibly give up one or two buildings so you can get the rest of them done?” Young asked. “Sometimes that’s the trade-off.”
The only way this doesn't look like a giant piece of crap is only if the "powers-that-be" present a constructive reconstruction of the 900 block of Locust that shows the final product is worth the loss of rather historical buildings. So far, we've got a lot of hot air and circular talk. Where's the net return for Downtown?
- 11K
We deserve a more thorough explanation on what the bill means, and what it doesn't.
The City no longer cares about the opinions of those who live in Dried-Up Asparagus Land.Alex Ihnen wrote:We deserve a more thorough explanation on what the bill means, and what it doesn't.
- 10K
"Get a row of buildings done" by tearing two of them down?Ward 7 Alderman Phyllis Young, who sponsored the current redevelopment bill, said the goal is to get “a row of buildings done” on Locust Street.
“Do you possibly give up one or two buildings so you can get the rest of them done?” Young asked. “Sometimes that’s the trade-off.”
If UrbanStreet only wants to rehab the Design Center building, they can sell off the other two to someone who will fix them up. There is plenty of space for a valet lane in front of the Design Center building - a driveway is not necessary.
- 1,320
A lot of what I'm hearing from city hall right now reminds me of my favorite 1952 speech by Mississippi lawmaker Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat, Jr ... on whether alcohol should be legalized in that state. 
If when you say preservation...
My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, here is how I feel about whiskey:
If when you say whiskey you mean the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.
But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life's great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.
This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/If-by-whiskey
If when you say preservation...
- 5,433
^ Haha! I've never seen that before. Well played.
I became disappointed with Mayor Slay long before he or his supporters thought it'd be a brilliant idea to go for an unprecedented fourth term. This is exactly the type of stand I expect him to take. He's careful not to alienate his supporters that actually want to live in something that resembles a major city, but he's also never going to say no to developers that insist on hundreds of parking spaces next to their development (or in this case, a bit of asphalt and some landscaping).
I'd like to think that our so-called leaders have learned from some of our most egregious mistakes, like tearing down the Ambassador Theater for what is now US Bank Plaza, or demolishing the San Luis so the Archdiocese could build a 'green' parking lot. And don't get me started on Fr. Biondi's wanton destruction of Midtown surrounding the SLU campus. But for every small victory like the Flying Saucer Starbucks/Chipotle, there are several crushing defeats like the aforementioned losses, the indifferent destruction of the Pevely complex, and the ongoing demolition of Cupples Warehouse #7. So hey, what will it hurt to demolish a couple of little and largely forgotten buildings in the heart of downtown, right? It's not like pedestrians aren't used to dodging cars in the middle of blocks anyway.
I became disappointed with Mayor Slay long before he or his supporters thought it'd be a brilliant idea to go for an unprecedented fourth term. This is exactly the type of stand I expect him to take. He's careful not to alienate his supporters that actually want to live in something that resembles a major city, but he's also never going to say no to developers that insist on hundreds of parking spaces next to their development (or in this case, a bit of asphalt and some landscaping).
I'd like to think that our so-called leaders have learned from some of our most egregious mistakes, like tearing down the Ambassador Theater for what is now US Bank Plaza, or demolishing the San Luis so the Archdiocese could build a 'green' parking lot. And don't get me started on Fr. Biondi's wanton destruction of Midtown surrounding the SLU campus. But for every small victory like the Flying Saucer Starbucks/Chipotle, there are several crushing defeats like the aforementioned losses, the indifferent destruction of the Pevely complex, and the ongoing demolition of Cupples Warehouse #7. So hey, what will it hurt to demolish a couple of little and largely forgotten buildings in the heart of downtown, right? It's not like pedestrians aren't used to dodging cars in the middle of blocks anyway.
- 8,155
More on Slay from KMOX:
"A spokesperson for St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay says he’s not sending mixed signals about preserving the city’s historic past.
Some have wondered why the mayor signed a redevelopment measure that could lead to the demolition of two downtown buildings at 10th and Locust Streets just days after meeting with preservationists on ways to save historic structures.
Slay’s communications director Maggie Crane says that by signing Ward 7 Alderwoman Phyllis Young’s bill, the mayor was not giving a green light to send in the wrecking ball."
More @ http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2013/07/24/ ... servation/
"A spokesperson for St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay says he’s not sending mixed signals about preserving the city’s historic past.
Some have wondered why the mayor signed a redevelopment measure that could lead to the demolition of two downtown buildings at 10th and Locust Streets just days after meeting with preservationists on ways to save historic structures.
Slay’s communications director Maggie Crane says that by signing Ward 7 Alderwoman Phyllis Young’s bill, the mayor was not giving a green light to send in the wrecking ball."
More @ http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2013/07/24/ ... servation/