I bet you that meeting will be behind doors and we will get a transcript once its over. At least it would fit the profile of what they have done so far. Make it public to a select few.
City+Arch+River is presenting today to give an update on what is going on with plans for the Arch grounds.
» Press Release
Also I recompiled the comments from the environmental assessment so that each comment is now whole instead of split into multiple pieces.
» Link to document on Scribd
» Press Release
Also I recompiled the comments from the environmental assessment so that each comment is now whole instead of split into multiple pieces.
» Link to document on Scribd
Looks like KSDK got an early look 
(ahhh lid and new exhibits)
http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/299485 ... enovations
(ahhh lid and new exhibits) http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/299485 ... enovations
Construction begins on the downtown riverfront
KMOV.com
Posted on March 14, 2012 at 5:42 PM
ST. LOUIS (KMOV) – Work is currently underway on a pilot project that could determine what the new St. Louis riverfront will look like.
Construction crews are tearing apart a section of Leonore K. Sullivan located at the foot of the Ead’s Bridge.
A new type of paving stones will be installed later this week, but first officials want to make sure the new stones will last with the daily traffic and flood conditions.
link: http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Construc ... 98895.html
KMOV.com
Posted on March 14, 2012 at 5:42 PM
ST. LOUIS (KMOV) – Work is currently underway on a pilot project that could determine what the new St. Louis riverfront will look like.
Construction crews are tearing apart a section of Leonore K. Sullivan located at the foot of the Ead’s Bridge.
A new type of paving stones will be installed later this week, but first officials want to make sure the new stones will last with the daily traffic and flood conditions.
link: http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Construc ... 98895.html
- 597
Sales tax increase sought to help pay for Arch grounds improvements
A proposed sales tax hike for much of the St. Louis area could fund a major chunk of the ambitious $553 million plan to overhaul the grounds of the Gateway Arch.
An obscure bill moving through the Legislature includes a provision that would allow residents to vote — possibly in November — on raising sales taxes in St. Louis, St. Louis County and St. Charles County by three-sixteenths of a cent (0.1875) for the Arch project and other area parks.
Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... z1pA6NPfdk
I think this will be good, and I hope it passes. I think that as STL citizens if we want this project to happen, we have to contribute to it as well. Though, I think that getting more federal money for the Arch grounds project will help the tax increase go through and ease citizen concerns.
- 11K
Quick opinion - this is a massive bait/switch. All along we've been told the project would be funding by government and private sources. It appears that federal and state money can't be found and private sources aren't footing the bill, so... tax increase! For once I think I agree with St. Charles County Exec:
"I don't think they ought to be asking people in St. Charles County who are struggling right now with the economy to raise their taxes to bail out the federal government on their responsibility," Ehlmann said.
"I don't think they ought to be asking people in St. Charles County who are struggling right now with the economy to raise their taxes to bail out the federal government on their responsibility," Ehlmann said.
- 2,386
Completely against the tax increase to fund this.
This is not a conservative objection. My objection is to the fact that this, like Alex said, has been a TOTAL bait and switch. The project design is short-sighted (IMO of course), and the people in charge of this seem to be dropping the ball. I do not have any confidence in the leaders of this project, and completely reject their blatent exclusion of the public throughout the process.
In addition, this is a federal monument, of which the federal gov. destroyed the entire riverfront to build and it is their responsibility to upkeep and improve the property. St. Louis cannot and should not should shoulder this fiscal burden.
This entire project (so far) has been a dissapointment. The standards and goals keep getting set lower and lower, and the metro area's contribution keeps going higher and higher. Seems like this is the perfect recipe for a future disaster. Very dissapointed about every aspect of this at current.
I had already said this before, but shelve the project. Return to it when it could be done right. Do not waste money (ESPECIALLY now LOCAL tax payer money) on a bad, poorly managed project.
Edit: Would completely support this same increase to be used for metro expansion (NS Line). Would yield exponentially greater returns for the money spent. Bait and Switch the Bait and Switch to that!
This is not a conservative objection. My objection is to the fact that this, like Alex said, has been a TOTAL bait and switch. The project design is short-sighted (IMO of course), and the people in charge of this seem to be dropping the ball. I do not have any confidence in the leaders of this project, and completely reject their blatent exclusion of the public throughout the process.
In addition, this is a federal monument, of which the federal gov. destroyed the entire riverfront to build and it is their responsibility to upkeep and improve the property. St. Louis cannot and should not should shoulder this fiscal burden.
This entire project (so far) has been a dissapointment. The standards and goals keep getting set lower and lower, and the metro area's contribution keeps going higher and higher. Seems like this is the perfect recipe for a future disaster. Very dissapointed about every aspect of this at current.
I had already said this before, but shelve the project. Return to it when it could be done right. Do not waste money (ESPECIALLY now LOCAL tax payer money) on a bad, poorly managed project.
Edit: Would completely support this same increase to be used for metro expansion (NS Line). Would yield exponentially greater returns for the money spent. Bait and Switch the Bait and Switch to that!
For those unfamiliar with my terminology, the Great White Fathers = Civic Progress (more or less). You'll note that the figurehead for Civic Progress is quoted several times in today's P-D article. You'll also note that precisely zero of the so-called civic "leaders" could be bothered to stand up and explain why this is a good idea.
While you're at it, check out the Civic Progress webpage and look at how much information on this is available under "Civic Progress in the news."
You really want to change St. Louis? Change this.
While you're at it, check out the Civic Progress webpage and look at how much information on this is available under "Civic Progress in the news."
You really want to change St. Louis? Change this.
I didn't take away that opinion on first read.Alex Ihnen wrote:Quick opinion - this is a massive bait/switch. All along we've been told the project would be funding by government and private sources. It appears that federal and state money can't be found and private sources aren't footing the bill, so... tax increase! For once I think I agree with St. Charles County Exec:
"I don't think they ought to be asking people in St. Charles County who are struggling right now with the economy to raise their taxes to bail out the federal government on their responsibility," Ehlmann said.
What I take away is a really bad headline by PD to the story when the majority of money raised would actually go towards local parks and the greenways/trails.
In other words, I think its a good idea to put forward to the voters. The current green way 1/10 sales tax has done wonders already for the regions quality of life and the trail system is something that gains favor where ever you live in the metro area. I believe the intention of this bill is to wholly fund a park/trail system as well as find a way to move Arch grounds forward. In addition, local say might have a lot more control when they actually are the ones with the purse strings. Instead, I hear two main gripes on this blog that the NPS can pick a design worth a crap and NPS should pay for it.
I also think this is ridiculous! Engage the public when you need $500 million? Get the hell out of here! This is the worst public process and planning attempt I have ever seen.
I totally agree with Alex! The Post-Dispatch mentioned that 70% of the new sales tax that they are proposing would go toward LOCAL parks and trails. Maybe instead of helping to fund the federally owned Arcg Grounds, the money that would go towards it could be spent on expanding the Riverfront trail to Soulard and perhaps even starting a bike sharing pilot program in Forest Park or along trails in the city where biking volumes are high. Just my opinion though!
I also agree with newstl2020 on the NS MetroLink line!
Chouteau Greenway should also be a priority if that's the case! How about a combination of greenways, trails, and metro extensions? I would support that!
The Chouteau Greenway and expanding the on street Bike St. Louis routes would be a WAY better case to make to voters instead of the Arch Grounds!
- 11K
(just really wanted to quote this)bonwich wrote:For those unfamiliar with my terminology, the Great White Fathers = Civic Progress (more or less). You'll note that the figurehead for Civic Progress is quoted several times in today's P-D article. You'll also note that precisely zero of the so-called civic "leaders" could be bothered to stand up and explain why this is a good idea.
While you're at it, check out the Civic Progress webpage and look at how much information on this is available under "Civic Progress in the news."
You really want to change St. Louis? Change this.
The way this could be/should be done is to have a community discussion about what we value and what could be done with x amount of funding. Then we make a choice. Instead, someone launches a massive effort telling people not to worry, there will be funding (in a whisper: that funding will come from you) and they're in charge of funding so if you disagree with the process, the design, or other decisions, you should really just be quiet.
I agree that this Arch grounds project hasn't had the best organization or leadership or communication. But I don't see anything wrong with STL citizens paying for a piece of the project. We use it. We should pay for it. Same goes for the Feds, the state, private businesses etc. The process "The Great White Fathers" have taken to go about funding this is not a good one. Duly noted. We should have all been part of the discussion not just those up top.
We all can disagree with their methods, but this sales tax increase, as a whole, will be beneficial for the region not just the Arch grounds. That's why I think it should pass.
We all can disagree with their methods, but this sales tax increase, as a whole, will be beneficial for the region not just the Arch grounds. That's why I think it should pass.
- 11K
^ Of course the sale tax increase would be good for the parks and the Arch grounds - no doubt. The conversation is whether it's needed, at what cost, what are the opportunity costs, who benefits...? As far as parks go, I'd venture that locals use the Arch grounds much, much less than STL County, City of STL and other municipal parks. Process matters and this hasn't been done well.
- 6,775
Most people I know still call it that.framer wrote:Would be nice if the name reverts back to Wharf Street.
Also, it's Highway 40, no matter what anyone else says.
- 3,428
If we can't pass a lousy 3/16th of a cent sales tax to improve downtown and metro parks, we should just stop trying to compete with cities like Oklahoma City. In 2009, they overwhelmingly passed MAPS 3, the third big civic improvement initiative since the original in 1993, all paid for with a 1 cent limited duration sales tax.
http://www.okc.gov/maps3/projects.html
The first MAPS provide $300 million that the city used to totally revamp their city image downtown with canals, botanical park, a minor league ballpark, and the 20K seat arena where the NBA Thunder now play. When the first MAPS expired in 2001, the voters repassed the 1 cent sales tax for "MAPS for Kids" to apply the money to the schools. In 2009, it was re-passed again and will raise $770 million over 7 years to construct trails, streetcars, sidwalks, health and wellness centers, etc.
Since they started this, the low real estate values turned around there and have risen every year since 2003 according to the Zillow plots, largely due to MAPS. No 2008 bust.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3832- ... 0187_zpid/
They are doing this pay-as-you-go. No debt. No federal dollars.
I'm not saying I want to move there, I'm saying maybe we should go big -- or bigger -- with a similar 1 cent sales tax and, yes, ask St. Charles to also contribute to their metro area's image and perhaps reap the benefits of higher real estate values. But if we are whining that we can't do 3/16 cent and the federal government should pay for our rebirth, we will not able to compete with smaller but more forward looking cities just down the road.
I'm hoping the voters see value in this and will pass the tax measure.
http://www.okc.gov/maps3/projects.html
The first MAPS provide $300 million that the city used to totally revamp their city image downtown with canals, botanical park, a minor league ballpark, and the 20K seat arena where the NBA Thunder now play. When the first MAPS expired in 2001, the voters repassed the 1 cent sales tax for "MAPS for Kids" to apply the money to the schools. In 2009, it was re-passed again and will raise $770 million over 7 years to construct trails, streetcars, sidwalks, health and wellness centers, etc.
Since they started this, the low real estate values turned around there and have risen every year since 2003 according to the Zillow plots, largely due to MAPS. No 2008 bust.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3832- ... 0187_zpid/
They are doing this pay-as-you-go. No debt. No federal dollars.
I'm not saying I want to move there, I'm saying maybe we should go big -- or bigger -- with a similar 1 cent sales tax and, yes, ask St. Charles to also contribute to their metro area's image and perhaps reap the benefits of higher real estate values. But if we are whining that we can't do 3/16 cent and the federal government should pay for our rebirth, we will not able to compete with smaller but more forward looking cities just down the road.
I'm hoping the voters see value in this and will pass the tax measure.