stlouiscitizen wrote:St. Louis Texan wrote:Why would anyone want to cancel this project? For almost any reason its gonna help revitalize the CWE and more importantly the city.
Now it's more than plenty vital at the corner of Euclid and Maryland with bars that bring in tourists from the county who pee in the yard of our 118 year old house that is several generations in the family, and leave beer bottles for me to run the mower over. And parking in front of the house-- forget it. Drunk girls screaming at 2am- plenty of that. I'm pretty tolerant though, I live and let live and understand and respect the relationship between residential and commercial interests. But this attracts crime, it doesn't increase property values, and it sometimes uses up resources that are funded by our property taxes.
Moving another 300 units of people not even a 1/2 block away will only add to the mess. Just think how difficult it is already to drive Euclid, make a left onto Lindell, etc...
So, in my immediate neighborhood, I'd like to not have the congestion, not have our property taxes support the additional strain on the infrastructure (due to TIFF), and I don't believe that this part of the neighborhood is "blighted." If Opus, Lyda, and the City want to fix blighted, they should build this building at the corner of Euclid and Delmar. That would be some true mixing of upper-class and blighted, and push the niceness boundry of the neighborhood farther north.
And, according to the language found in Board Bill 358CS
http://stlcin.missouri.org/Document/ald ... /BB358.pdf), I really don't like how Opus is planning to target people who live "an alternative lifestyle." That is just offensive language, the equivalent of, "we think they are abnormal but we'll take their money anyway."
But most of all, I don't think it's right for a corporate interest (that isn't even based in our local economy) to recieve special treatment from city officials, especially when this may break the law and create a bad historic preservation precedent. Yes, St. Louis needs development, but needs to travel down a more responsible path and develop the areas that are impoverished, need infrastructure built, and need to be revitalized. Just think, the parking lot next to the Breadco is pretty crappy and might make a nice revitalization high-rise project too-- just tear down a few hundred year old houses next to it for the parking garage. But it makes more sense to build these "revitalization projects" someplace else where it won't affect continuing to live in our nice houses, our view, the traffic, the added strain on the other infrastructure and will help elevate the standard of living and property values along the less affluent fringes of the neighborhood. That is how you help with revitilization.
A. Drunken people spending money does not create crime, it only creates revenue for bars and restaraunts which prevent crime due to their patrons. When there is activity in a neighborhood, crime stays away. You should be glad that your neighborhood is lucky enough to have this activity, many do not.
I have never seen any crime in Maryland Plaza, you must be stereotyping.
I have also never seen people throwing beer bottles in the front yards of houses. Furthermore, there are no houses in Maryland Plaza, at least not directly connected to the plaza.
If there is problems with this behavior, then you should call the police, instead of protesting development.
Finally, this development is not a 40 story Casino/Bar; this is residential, and the requirement for tennancy is not 20something drunks. You are stereotyping the type of residents that this building will attract.
B. Cities are dense, this is why they are called 'Urban' and not 'Suburban'. Traffic on Lindell is far better than St. Charles, where I used to live; I think you should view this traffic as positive. People obviously enjoy driving through Lindell, when they could take other streets, or the highway. The traffic is not very bad on Lindell, and another building is not going to tip it over 'the edge.'
C. Again, alternative lifestyle does not mean they will be sacrificing goats and smoking crack, while engaging in sodomy with a horse. Maybe they mean alternative compared to living in a house, or living in the suburbs. You need to realize that alternative is good. CWE offers an alternative lifestyle to my neighborhood of North Hampton, in that the CWE is more diverse and Urban in its housing and night life. Alternatives is what people need; if the city offers no alternatives, then it would be boring and stagnant.
D. Corporate interests are the people with the dollars for development. Are you planning on rehabbing houses in North St. Louis personally? Do you plan on raising the funds to develop areas of the city which are in decline? If not then you need to reevaulate your position. You are saying you want to turn away corporate investment in your neighborhood, when many other neighborhoods would kill for this. I cannot believe you are against development in your neighborhood.
These developments are not going to affect your lifestyle. I do not understand how citizens can say that a tower will truely affect their lives. Development of this kind is good, and if this tower is all you have to complain about, then your neighborhood is in good condition, be happy for that.
E. This building will be historic in 50-75 Years. New development must occur if you wish to have a neighborhood in 50-75 years. Create something for your children instead of being narrowminded and ethnocentric.
