urbanSTL

Do you sell off parts of your car when you need to get a repair?

I would happily sell you the fuzzy troll I put on my antenae four years ago if you would pay enough to maintain my car for the next couple years. Yes, I'm comparing Hudlin 'Park' to a fuzzy antenae troll.

This is some dumb $hit. While their "bad precedent" argument is well-taken, I don't think anything can be gained by stifling ONE OF THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT INSTITUTIONS IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA. Come on people, choose your battles. The only people I ever saw in that part of the park were BJC employees anyway.

^true that. BJC is one of the biggest employers in st. louis. now i dont think that theyll decide to relocate to west county or something because of this but i dont think it was really worth it to shoot this down. the 2 million dollars BJC would have payed each year plus the 1.8 million that forest park forever promissed to pledge wouldve come in very handy every year.

^As in favor of BJC leasing that part of Forest Park as I am, I still think they're bluffing when they say that they'll expand in the suburbs instead of the city as a result. I think that's a bunch of crap to get the ball back in their court. Their centrifuge is the central corridor, and there are plenty of vacant lots and parking lots to the east of their medical campus on which to build if they want to. Better yet-- they own all of them, so the controversy is nonexistent. They'll have their cake and eat it, just maybe with their hands instead of silverware.

do you think its better for forest park though in the long run to lose a guaranteed 3.8 million dollars a year?

JivecitySTL wrote:^As in favor of BJC leasing that part of Forest Park as I am, I still think they're bluffing when they say that they'll expand in the suburbs instead of the city as a result. I think that's a bunch of crap to get the ball back in their court. Their centrifuge is the central corridor, and there are plenty of vacant lots and parking lots to the east of their medical campus on which to build if they want to. Better yet-- they own all of them, so the controversy is nonexistent. They'll have their cake and eat it, just maybe with their hands instead of silverware.

They do own a significant parcel of land at Highway 40 and Mason Road (the current site of the MO Highway Patrol), so it's not totally out of the question.

I'm still so frustrated by this. Shrewsbury and Green may have just voted against thousands of new city residents making above average salaries, $4 million/year in guaranteed financing for our most valuable park land, and tens of millions in possible taxes, to save a tiny parcel of Forest Park that only 1% of the region knows IS part of Forest Park. I also don't know if I would consider a plot of land covered in half by a parking garage and non-utilized park land "park".



Just stupid. We take a step forward in this city just to take two steps back.

I always thought Jim Shrewsbury was one of the people who really "got it." I was planning to vote for his re-election, although now I am seriously going to reconsider my decision. This deal is an absolute slap in the face to one of the most important institutions in the Midwest. BJC has been an invaluable corporate citizen, and the City (who needs them the most) can't throw them a bone? It's this kind of conservatism that makes me the most worried for STL's future.

JivecitySTL wrote:I always thought Jim Shrewsbury was one of the people who really "got it." I was planning to vote for his re-election, although now I am seriously going to reconsider my decision. This deal is an absolute slap in the face to one of the most important institutions in the Midwest. BJC has been an invaluable corporate citizen, and the City (who needs them the most) can't throw them a bone? It's this kind of conservatism that makes me the most worried for STL's future.

I agree with you on Shrewsbury. The sad thing is, had he voted for BJC, Lewis Reed would just use it against him in the election.

Mayor Slay did say on KWMU this morning that he hoped to revive the issue soon. I agree with most comments on this issue. The amazing this is that the 'park' amenities would have stayed (just across the street), parks may have been built IN the neighborhoods and BJC would have added employees. It's tempting to think that BJC is so entwined in the CWE that they wouldn't dare go elsewhere, but many jobs aren't tied to the area. They could be sent to west county. Also, the current hospital is somewhat trapped. Of course there's land to the east, but you can't have two hospital towers separated by 2,000 ft and expect the hospital to function well. I hope the park amendment fails (though fear it will pass) and that a deal can be reached. It doesn't seem that BJC is anywhere near wanting to break ground, but they're planning for 10, 20 years out. Let's hope that they still consider StLCity a good place to be.

From the Arch City Chronicle:

"We did it!" said Carla Scissors-Cohen of Citizens to Protect Forest Park, who called her husband to tell him the news. "This is a victory for the citizens of St. Louis."



"You can fight city hall," said Scissors-Cohen. "You can fight city hall if you feel the city is doing something not in the interest of the city."

^ My opinion is that she's about to learn that "City Hall" will still win in the end. I applaud her passion, I really do, but the boogeyman of City Hall doesn't exist anymore, IMO. My question is why Forest Park Forever hasn't been active in supporting this. They've vowed to raise millions to match the proposed BJC payment, but they haven't been vocal. I would like to see those who have put to most effort into the park, speak for the park. How would Carla sound arguing with Forest Park Forever instead of "City Hall"?

^Exactly. I really think FPF couldve been more actively involved in supporting this deal. It isnt like they were afraid of losing donations if they had spoken up (they pledged 1.8 million dollars a year for god sakes) But I agree. People like her may not have been so adamantly against this if there had been an article in the paper about Forest Park Forever supporting this or something

I just read the last few pages... Sounds like this would have been a great deal for the city and FP. I'm sure this will be back as a top priority in the near future.



Yes, BJC has many lots to the east, but's what stopping them from building up?



EDIT: Oh ya! NIMBYDIOTS!!!

^ Great. So Forest Park Forever doesn't take a stand on the most important issue the park has faced in decades.

I hardly think pledging 1.8 million dollars qualifies as flying under the radar

When I first read all the bad press and saw the signs in many yards, I thought BJC was looking to take at least 50 - 100 acres .. not a corner

that's cut off by a 6 lane mini highway. It's my opinion which I enjoy sharing is they will be back and sweeeetinnn the deal .. FPF will again support it and the deal will get done as it should.. which in turn will allow the park a great future for the next 50 or so years.

Carla Scissors-Cohen



Who is this ho? Where does she live? Maybe she should get out her checkbook and make it out to Forest Park, $1.8 M...

BJC is currently planning for the next two decades. They will be tearing down Queeny tower and need space to build that is still connected to the emergency rooms etc. I don't think this neccessity has been articulated by well by BJC. If they must wait to built until Queeny is down capacity will have to be increased elsewhere (most likely on their land out Hwy 40). Otherwise, they will need to build an entirely new facility a couple blocks east of Queeny tower - and at that point, with that size investment, BJC will have to consider where its paying population base is and where demand for beds/healthcare is located (hint: IT'S WEST).

way to go Carla

I don't know why they would tear down Queeny Tower. It's such a cool annex IMO. Can't they renovate it for their needs?