1,585
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,585

PostJul 16, 2007#26

I don't understand how giving people food is against the law. I mean, I'm impartial on this debate really, I just don't see how that could be justified. Not argueing for or against it, just trying to see how that would be done.

5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostJul 16, 2007#27

Shimmy wrote:I don't understand how giving people food is against the law. I mean, I'm impartial on this debate really, I just don't see how that could be justified. Not argueing for or against it, just trying to see how that would be done.
It most likely violates health codes, for one. Food is available for the homeless at specified downtown locations. No one starves.

1,585
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,585

PostJul 16, 2007#28

That would make sense.

64
New MemberNew Member
64

PostJul 16, 2007#29

This thread concerns Lucas Park. Eliminating the homeless from Lucas Park is something constructive that we should strive for. Therefore, I will continue to participate in this thread.


You are not participating, you are simply lobbing hand grenades. The OP expressly stated his intent to not duplicate the complaintfest on the homeless thread but instead focus on constructive solutions. I agree that eliminating homelessNESS is something we should all strive for. I am well aware from previous posts that you would love to eliminate the homeless.



I hear that there are no dirty homeless or hippies in Ladue...



[/quote]

5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostJul 16, 2007#30

^ If this is truly your mission, then why are you calling him a close-minded elitist and tossing hand grenades back at him? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

801
Super MemberSuper Member
801

PostJul 16, 2007#31

The OP expressly stated his intent to not duplicate the complaintfest on the homeless thread but instead focus on constructive solutions.


Yeah, if only someone would post an example of how a major city dealt with similar problems in one of their parks, then we could start to discuss how their solution could be applied to ours...



Hmmmm...

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostJul 17, 2007#32


PostJul 17, 2007#33

homeless congregate in this park because it is next door to Larry Rice's NLEC. It's time to take it over by eminent domain. I don't care how politically unpopular it might be with some people. Surely they understand this this is little more than a flop house purely used for Larry Rice's own political self-aggrandizement. St. Patricks center seems to be doing fine. It's time the city acted. enough excuses.

181
Junior MemberJunior Member
181

PostJul 17, 2007#34

when biking (and taking photos saturday) I saw a few signs in windows of businesses and I jotted the site down and went to it when I got home.

www.littledeviant.com



it has a harmless game where you kill the 'sheeple' in the city.

801
Super MemberSuper Member
801

PostJul 17, 2007#35

JCity wrote:


My, that park overlooked by a turn of the century Beaux Arts library looks like a smaller scale of this one in New York City.







Hmmm, why is the latter one not overrun with homeless people and criminals?



What's that you say? The park used to be overrun with criminals and drug dealers until the late 1980s when the city finally turned the park over to private management.



Oh, here's their website.



Oh wow, there are rules and regulations posted.



Rules and regulations

You are welcome…



* to visit the park during the hours posted

* to use open areas, including the lawn

* to enjoy the gardens without entering flowerbeds or picking flowers

* to use a park chair or one seat on a bench designed for sharing

* to deposit waste in trash receptacles

* to bring your dog, providing you leash it, keep it from watering trees and plants, and clean up after it



Park guidelines prohibit…



* entering the park after the hours posted

* drug use

* alcohol use outside the Grill and Cafe

* organized ballgames

* panhandling

* sitting or standing on ballustrades

* entering the fountain

* feeding pigeons

* rummaging in trash receptacles

* amplified music that disturbs others

* performances, except by permit

* commercial activity, except by permit

* obstructing park entrances

* walking dogs on the lawn

* use of plastic tarps on the lawn


Isn't that discriminating against the homeless though? Oh, EVERYONE is subject to those rules, whether they live on the street or a Ladue mansion.



But that's easy to say, but who is going to enforce it, the city doesn't have the money to police a park all of the time. Really? The corporation pays its own security force and not a single dollar comes from tax money...that's incredible, why haven't we tried it?



Hmmm...aren't Bryant Park and NYC a lot bigger than Lucas Park and STL though? Wow, the director the park saids that "There is nothing that we have done in Bryant Park that couldn't be done in other city parks and that couldn't be done with other city facilities"?





I dunno...let's just stick to the status quo. I already invited a bunch of my new park friends over for a bbq.




8
New MemberNew Member
8

PostJul 17, 2007#36

<i>

<b>Re:Message from Alderman Kacie Starr Triplett 2007/06/20 08:36</b>

What a great challenge…thanks. It would be great to get a dialogue going about the challenges of our diverse socio-economic Downtown population. The newest Downtown residents are dealing with some of the same challenges other gentrified neighborhoods such as Soulard and Lafayette Square faced twenty years ago.



EVERYONE, including our homeless citizens, WANTS TO BE SAFE. Let’s work on this together, somehow – this is what we need to talk about. While there are some scary and dangerous people out there, not all of them are homeless, and not all of the homeless are a threat.



There are 1700 homeless people Downtown. Many of them have a mental illness or a disability. Most of them work at some kind of job. They sell beer at the ball park or clean it up after games, clean your office building, cook at restaurants we all enjoy, and stand on street corners waving advertising signs. At night a fraction of them sleep in a bed in shelters like Rev. Larry Rice’s or at Soulard’s Peter & Paul. The rest are on the street, sleeping in doorways, under vehicles, among shrubbery, on benches – anywhere. But don’t be fooled, they don’t sleep very well. The same people who scare the Loft residents also prey upon the homeless.



The City of St. Louis’ Department of Human Services coordinates the Homeless Services Network, a community-based process that provides programs for the wide ranging needs of people who live on the street. I am very proud of my city to have so many caring people at the dozens of agencies that provide services such as hot meals, shelter, clothing and counseling.



One of the newest services of the network is a 24 hour drop in center initiated by the St. Louis Office for Developmental Disabilities Resources and opening July 1 at the edge of Downtown.



The Horizon Club offers showers, bathrooms, laundry, lounge, coffee, snacks, lockers, computers, video games, movies, and transitional housing. Information is available about where to go for emergency shelters, food, clothes, employment sources, health and medical services, and more. Classes are planned on Literacy, Resumes, and Interview Skills. Art, chess, poetry, music, gardening and computer clubs are forming. Nurses from Grace Hill Health Services visit weekly, as does a substance abuse counselor.



Those of us working and volunteering at the Horizon Club have found ourselves getting to know our participants as individuals. When we encounter one of them on the street or in some of our Downtown public places, it’s like greeting a neighbor.



Get to know your Downtown homeless neighbors. Come by and visit the Horizon Club at 202 23rd Street. Volunteer opportunities are available.



For more information call Candace Ulrich (314) 249-5415.



P.S. Donations of socks and underwear is very much appreciated. We can also use towels, soap, shampoo and all personal care products. </i>



<b>http://dslra.org/component/option,com_f ... ,10/#10</b>

PostJul 17, 2007#37

-> the homeless actually DO go hungry: on the weekends when the kitchens are closed.



-> i think public bathroom (and some shower) facilities in the parks would be a wonderful addition for all residents.



-> i am not very impressed with what i have observed of rice's nlec facility, however i think it would be a mistake to completely discount him as he might be a cooperating force in working toward safety for all residents, cleanliness, and improving the plight of the homeless.



-> perhaps it would be helpful to brainstorm a list of people/groups who would be amenable to collaborating with us towards the aforementioned goals:



Downtown StL Residents' Assoc.

NLEC

City of St. Louis

Kacie Starr Triplett

StL Public Library

Christ Church

Centenary Church

StL Horizon Club

City of StL Homeless Services Network Board

St. Patrick's Center



more suggestions???

5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostJul 17, 2007#38

- No one is going to help turn Lucas Park into more of a flop house than it already is. Installing showers and bathroom in this public park would only attract more homeless and create a bigger problem for downtown residents, businesses and visitors.



- The homeless don't go hungry. It stands to reason, because they can afford alcohol, cigarettes and drugs.



- Rice a cooperating force? Uh, tell that to the homeless people he's rejected because they weren't black enough or wouldn't market for him by being a nuisance downtown to raise his image.



- If you want to help, read the 10 year plan and help to meet its goals through sanctioned agencies: http://stlcin.missouri.org/release/getp ... m?Auto=933



- The Bryant Park idea rocks! Imagine the mark the Mayor could create if he could turn this idea into fruition. There would be a lot of thankful people, and property values around this area would increase.

6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostJul 17, 2007#39

johnny sunshine wrote:<i>

<b>Re:Message from Alderman Kacie Starr Triplett 2007/06/20 08:36</b>

What a great challenge…thanks. It would be great to get a dialogue going about the challenges of our diverse socio-economic Downtown population.


Dear Kacie:



I stopped reading at this point. "Dialogue", "challenges", "diverse socio-economic". All politician double-speak. Real people don't use these buzzwords, Kacie. You come across as a pompous beauocratic fool.



Signed,



TCS

PostJul 17, 2007#40

innov8ion wrote:- No one is going to help turn Lucas Park into more of a flop house than it already is. Installing showers and bathroom in this public park would only attract more homeless and create a bigger problem for downtown residents, businesses and visitors.



- The homeless don't go hungry. It stands to reason, because they can afford alcohol, cigarettes and drugs.



- Rice a cooperating force? Uh, tell that to the homeless people he's rejected because they weren't black enough or wouldn't market for him by being a nuisance downtown to raise his image.



- If you want to help, read the 10 year plan and help to meet its goals through sanctioned agencies: http://stlcin.missouri.org/release/getp ... m?Auto=933



- The Bryant Park idea rocks! Imagine the mark the Mayor could create if he could turn this idea into fruition. There would be a lot of thankful people, and property values around this area would increase.


Five excellent observations.

2,331
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
2,331

PostJul 17, 2007#41

Sincerely, Bryant Park is an excellent model - I love that park. Will the Rockefellers kick in the funds for Lucas Park, too? Not being smart, but is there foundation offering the money to turn Lucas Park into a Bryant Park? And if they do, won't the problem just move to the other side of the library?

6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostJul 17, 2007#42

Expat wrote:Sincerely, Bryant Park is an excellent model - I love that park. Will the Rockefellers kick in the funds for Lucas Park, too? Not being smart, but is there foundation offering the money to turn Lucas Park into a Bryant Park?


What's that foundation that the Danforths and the other Bornwells are behind? I think they're financing the Gateway Mall plan.


Expat wrote:And if they do, won't the problem just move to the other side of the library?


Then we'll privatize that one too.

1,355
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,355

PostJul 17, 2007#43

"Sunken Gardens"



Interesting how grand visions and places fade over time.



Neglect and lack of reasonable oversight can really be devastating, especially when they reach some scale.

64
New MemberNew Member
64

PostJul 17, 2007#44




Their park is completely privately funded. On their website it says "Did you know As a New Yorker, none of your tax money goes to Bryant Park. The Park is entirely financed by private money: you get it for free."


Does that mean that everyone abuses it because they don't pay for it? :wink:



Seriously, though - it is an interesting case study. However, I don't really see how any of the things Bryant Park does could not be done by the City with political will and monetary backing. It seems that there are some very large pockets or at least some mega fund raising occurring there, something Lucas Park could use in abundance.



As for rules, it seems to me that most of the big problems everyone complains about are already against posted rules / ordinances. Lack of money and will for enforcement and manpower seems to be the issue.



Private security or hiring of off-duty police seems like something that the CID could be used for. Maybe instead of the not-so-useful CID guides.



I did notice that Bryant Park provides bathrooms. I am sure that they are well maintained and monitored, which makes all the difference.

2,331
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
2,331

PostJul 17, 2007#45

CS, good answer, I would love it if the Danforths stepped up for Lucas Park. It makes since he is Episcopalian and Christ Church Cathedral is in view of the park.



But, until they step up, all ideas should be considered, even Johnny Sunshine & others.



When my dog was a puppy about 15 years ago, I lived on Lafayette Square. It seems like the neighbors adopted the park, cultivated flower gardens at their own expense, and maintained them. Also, plenty of activities were planned in the park. So dogwalkers, flower gardeners, joggers, street people, etc. mingled. Downtown dwellers should take a similar approach. Join Johnny Sunshine and others to use the park, establish flower gardens, maybe even give different buildings different sections of the park to landscape and maintain. I don't know the answer, just throwing out ideas.

5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostJul 17, 2007#46

bab wrote:I did notice that Bryant Park provides bathrooms. I am sure that they are well maintained and monitored, which makes all the difference.
That's not a bathroom. It's a $200,000 comfort station. A far cry from the port-a-potties people are calling for in Lucas Park. Ref: http://www.bryantpark.org/park-manageme ... 06-nyt.php

1,355
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,355

PostJul 17, 2007#47

The big issue discussed in another thread was that the city lost an ACLU lawsuit brought on behalf of vagrants. Since that time, the city apparently has a "hands off" policy making it difficult to address most of the problems. Privitizing many of the city's small and pocket parks would be one way to side-step some legal issues.



Most of the care and feeding of public park areas in Soulard are also done by resident volunteers.

6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostJul 17, 2007#48

innov8ion wrote:
bab wrote:I did notice that Bryant Park provides bathrooms. I am sure that they are well maintained and monitored, which makes all the difference.
That's not a bathroom. It's a $200,000 comfort station. A far cry from the port-a-potties people are calling for in Lucas Park. Ref: http://www.bryantpark.org/park-manageme ... 06-nyt.php


So if I ever decide to sell my condo, I'll advertise it as 2 bedroom / 2 comfort station. 8)

801
Super MemberSuper Member
801

PostJul 17, 2007#49

While Bryant Park does get a lot of support from the affluent, it also makes money off of events, renting space to restaurants, etc. I believe that it also has some sort of deal where businesses fronting the park contribute funds. They are willing to pay this money because having the park across the street greatly increases the land values and brings in more business.



Lucas Park and the parks to the south need not be nearly as grand as Bryant Park, they just need enough to be landscaped and have a security officer or two to enforce the rules.



I think that the owners of property facing the parks should form their own corporation to control these parks. It is in their interest to make them into an asset because their rents and land values will increase. Park Pacific has already made plans to improve the parks that it faces. Skyhouse (and hopefully a future tower with a restaurant on the parking lot directly west) have every incentive to make Lucas Park attractive as well.

6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostJul 17, 2007#50

Bastiat wrote:I think that the owners of property facing the parks should form their own corporation to control these parks. It is in their interest to make them into an asset because their rents and land values will increase. Park Pacific has already made plans to improve the parks that it faces. Skyhouse (and hopefully a future tower with a restaurant on the parking lot directly west) have every incentive to make Lucas Park attractive as well.


That was going to be my next question - how do we get started? As a downtown resident, I would gladly "buy" into this corporation.

Read more posts (352 remaining)