urbanSTL

You guys may not see regional planning moving forward, but it's happening. No, the MPO doesn't have "authority" to change zoning but it has the will and the ability to lead a discussion in the region about growth, development, and competition - which it has been doing. You're familiar with the story about public subsidy and development, I assume. http://www.ewgateway.org/blogs/rtr/inde ... d-to-find/

Are you familiar with the efforts that St. Louis County is currently undertaking, reviewing and updating zoning? http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2bc8b.html

There are seemingly 1 billion municipalities in St. Louis, but there's a finite number of them touched by - and that benefit from - the location of transit centers. That's a good starting point for who should be thinking about these ideas. Metro is working with EWG right now, the HUD grant is going to help pay for some of the work that needs doing for the whole region. The Moving Transit Forward process can serve as a model for how we can engage the region - not just elected officials, but citizens, business leaders, and institutions - and help everyone understand why economic development is the other half of the transit puzzle, the half we've been missing.

Also know that Metro repeated over and over, during the long-range plan process, that no project will be built in St. Louis without federal dollars. That's not just us, that's the elected leaders saying that. Well, the federal dollars will only come if you meet the requirements of the grants, and that includes supportive land use policies. TOD planning is just a part of implementing the 30-year plan.

That said, I don't disagree about the importance of infill and rehab for this region. Anyone who attending Open/Closed, like me, is appalled by the vacancy numbers in the City. We've got to address vacancies, school, police, and planning policy, all at the same time - and after yesterday, we've got five years to do it.

I don't know about you guys, but I woke up this morning with a sense of being on a precipice. I feel more energized and dedicated than ever to make a difference in this region every single day, in every way that I can. Who's with me?

jennifer wrote:You guys may not see regional planning moving forward, but it's happening. No, the MPO doesn't have "authority" to change zoning but it has the will and the ability to lead a discussion in the region about growth, development, and competition - which it has been doing. You're familiar with the story about public subsidy and development, I assume. http://www.ewgateway.org/blogs/rtr/inde ... d-to-find/

Are you familiar with the efforts that St. Louis County is currently undertaking, reviewing and updating zoning? http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2bc8b.html

There are seemingly 1 billion municipalities in St. Louis, but there's a finite number of them touched by - and that benefit from - the location of transit centers. That's a good starting point for who should be thinking about these ideas. Metro is working with EWG right now, the HUD grant is going to help pay for some of the work that needs doing for the whole region. The Moving Transit Forward process can serve as a model for how we can engage the region - not just elected officials, but citizens, business leaders, and institutions - and help everyone understand why economic development is the other half of the transit puzzle, the half we've been missing.

Also know that Metro repeated over and over, during the long-range plan process, that no project will be built in St. Louis without federal dollars. That's not just us, that's the elected leaders saying that. Well, the federal dollars will only come if you meet the requirements of the grants, and that includes supportive land use policies. TOD planning is just a part of implementing the 30-year plan.

That said, I don't disagree about the importance of infill and rehab for this region. Anyone who attending Open/Closed, like me, is appalled by the vacancy numbers in the City. We've got to address vacancies, school, police, and planning policy, all at the same time - and after yesterday, we've got five years to do it.

I don't know about you guys, but I woke up this morning with a sense of being on a precipice. I feel more energized and dedicated than ever to make a difference in this region every single day, in every way that I can. Who's with me?

I think a lot of us are with you. The trouble is that St. Louis is so anti-moving forward (generally speaking). How often is St. Louis at the forefront of any progressive planning, design or policy?

The positive in my mind is the younger generations, who refuse to continue to live as we have. For some that means leaving St. Louis, but there are still a great number of young people who are really trying to get St. Louis thinking forward. Add this to the seemingly growing number of people in the older cohorts taking some forward steps, St. Louis does have some great promise in the not to distant future. One of the challenges though is figuring out how to best use your skills and hard work to make something happen. Too often we seem to talk about things and never take the next step. Now, thats no knock on talking, because it is starting line for moving forward.

I also agree with you that we have to comprehend the economics of TODs. Once you can sell that, the private sector will step forward. My concern, and this is always the case with private developers/companies IMO, is there will be some claim that new developments are TODs but instead will really just be TAD equivalents. Another way to illustrate my point is looking at companies that are "going green". Most of what they are doing is greenwashing. To ensure that we do not get more big-box stores and park n' rides, we have to make regulations and policies that guide solid TOD development practices. Conversely, St. Louis is very pro-development to the point where these regulations and policies are likely to become too lax. It seems this is often the case with similar types of development, funds and policies. So what can we do to change that? Leadership will be key here IMO.


As for EWG, it seems they are finally starting to get more accomplished. I hope moving forward, their voice becomes more widely heard and regarded. Given the political landscape in St.Louis, I can see how difficult it can be for an MPO in St. Louis, so I am by no means knocking them when I say their voice isn't loud enough to ears of the community. I think with increased citizen/professional/academic groups and organizations working with EWG, in addition to their continued growth, they could really help St. Louis do some amazing things.

I absolutely agree with your point about TAD. A lot of people - citizens, leaders, developers - don't understand the difference. That's a big role that Metro and EWG can play in this region; just like many people didn't understand the economic argument for transit until we took the time to go out and explain about it, and hear people's concerns. That's exactly what I meant when I wrote that the TOD planning process - at least from Metro's point of view - can use the long-range plan process as a good model of engagement.

As for your more general concerns, who is "St. Louis" when it comes to not being known for innovation? St. Louis has a rich history, good building stock, a great location in the center of the nation, and a lot of great forward-looking and smart people. We just have to reach them, explain why what we're doing is important, and count on them to move it forward. To me, it's engagement that's severely lacking around here, not intelligence, will, or innovation.

jennifer wrote:I absolutely agree with your point about TAD. A lot of people - citizens, leaders, developers - don't understand the difference. That's a big role that Metro and EWG can play in this region; just like many people didn't understand the economic argument for transit until we took the time to go out and explain about it, and hear people's concerns. That's exactly what I meant when I wrote that the TOD planning process - at least from Metro's point of view - can use the long-range plan process as a good model of engagement.

As for your more general concerns, who is "St. Louis" when it comes to not being known for innovation? St. Louis has a rich history, good building stock, a great location in the center of the nation, and a lot of great forward-looking and smart people. We just have to reach them, explain why what we're doing is important, and count on them to move it forward. To me, it's engagement that's severely lacking around here, not intelligence, will, or innovation.

I am glad that we agree on the TAD issue.

As for the second part, I agree that we have to reach them, but how exactly? What is the best approach, or probably a better line of thinking, approaches? Surely St. Louis has its positive attributes and one of them is a great higher education system. We do have some innovators here, but the parochialism and political climate mask those people IMO. So how can we make their voices heard and enable them to tell stories that catalyze positive change?

I hope I am not confusing people to think I am a pessimist or stuck in the mud, because I bring up tough to answer questions. That is not my intention. I am optimistic about future possibilities and I am on board with helping move St. Louis forward. However, these questions IMO are the ones we should be asking if we really want to move forward. I think the work that we see done via City to River and the Open/Closed series are positive steps. Can we build off those efforts and catalyze a proactive network of leaders in St. Louis? Can we have citizen organizations that augment/ work in coordination with our MPO, city departments, Metro...etc. ? Its my hope that we both will and can. At the same time, we need to make sure these groups are producing sound research that foster smart decision making. Can we have more competitions that evoke actualized change in St. Louis?

doug wrote:I would recommend people read that link I posted previously about TOD. It discusses all of these problems.

TOD is about increasing transit ridership. Does Metro or East West Gateway have a definition of TOD, the required densities and mixes of uses to support transit service at the node, and finally model codes on how to implement it? Are they assembling land around stations to bring large parcels for developers to do TOD? Metro should buy off the strip mall around Forest Park Station and hand it to someone for intensification along with their parking lot.

Doug, I thought this was already in the works for the small strip mall near FP station via a McCormick Baron/Metro proposal. Like all significant residential/mixed use developments in CWE/FPSE, its stalled because of financing if not mistaken. Which is a whole other issue

My hope, our thought, is that Prop A funds for expansion would be better used at this time to do smaller capital projects that strengthen the existing and extend the current metrolink system. A good example would be supporting the loop trolley and, I know you don't want to hear it, but part of the parking desired. Such as funds to take parking underground, etc. Yes, parking gives the option to drive and certainly dilutes the definition of TOD. But, I don't see private financing supporting pure TOD's in STL (Maybe NY, Chicago, San Fran, etc)

doug wrote:I would recommend people read that link I posted previously about TOD. It discusses all of these problems.

TOD is about increasing transit ridership. Does Metro or East West Gateway have a definition of TOD, the required densities and mixes of uses to support transit service at the node, and finally model codes on how to implement it? Are they assembling land around stations to bring large parcels for developers to do TOD? Metro should buy off the strip mall around Forest Park Station and hand it to someone for intensification along with their parking lot.

I like the idea of model codes like is being done in Denver.

Can EWG assemble land? I thought not. Metro, maybe, but do they have the buying power to make much of an impact.?

I agree with the point re: private financing, that's why banks and developers need to be a part of this education campaign. It's hard to convince local lenders to take chances on investments when there are no working models, regionally, to point to. However, it can happen. Check out the new development in East St. Louis at the Emerson Park MetroLink station - they have a lender from New Jersey.

Yes, Metro/EWG are working on "models" - codes, plans - as part of the HUD Sustainable Planning Grant process. You have to understand the difference between working somewhere like Denver, with one large regional authority, and St. Louis, where each municipality can have its own zoning codes. Our role here is to raise issues and make recommendations, not to force changes communities don't want/agree with. We have no authority over zoning codes; but we can serve as transit and development experts who reach out to communities to discuss a potentially different way of doing things.

Regarding land banking, it's a great idea. Fund it. Right now the ability to use federal dollars for land banking is essentially nothing. There's talk of changing that p[olicy, because someone has finally realized it might benefit the transit agencies to capture some of the increased value of transit-node-adjacent property, but for right now the policy barriers preclude doing it with federal money. Local money could be used...if there were local money to support land banking. That said, there are a variety of ways to use some federal monies for certain improvements (ped connectivity, upgrades like sidewalks, etc.), private investment, new market tax credits, and other creative financing to build a private-public partnership at transit nodes. Financing is hard to get right now but to me that says this is the PERFECT time to be planning for when the markets take off again, as they will do at some point.

jennifer wrote:zun, I wanted to reply to your point individually. YES, our transit system reaches areas that are ripe for redevelopment. Take a look at Wellston and Rock Road MetroLink stations - they are in perfect places for redevelopment efforts. North Hanley - there's development going on all around it right now. Shiloh-Scott, right up next to a big chunk of residential development that serves the AFB community. Emerson Park. 5th & Missouri. Washington Park. Grand. Nearly every ML station could use some more-dense development with more passenger-focused amenities. The only thing standing in the way is financing, and sometimes zoning codes.

Here's one thing that bothers me about the "development" discussion - people are inevitably thinking "retail and mixed-income housing," which is great. But St. Louis has a great diversity of areas that are served by MetroLink, and what works at Forest Park-DeBaliviere may not be the ideal TOD model for Wellston. We constantly hear about promoting St. Louis as a place for innovation, bio-science, and technology. Here you have a light rail station in an area that is blighted, already zoned for light industrial. What a great place to set up a manufacturing facility; only done in the "new" style (instead of blank walls on the street level, have some retail or some office space on the streetfront/ground floor) - and truly orient it to the transit station so employees can travel easily from the station to their jobs. It would be nice to target employers who can bring jobs to a neighborhood that the residents are qualified to do; just another example of why targeting the same types of development for each location doesn't make sense.

As I said above, St. Louis has some great assets - great "bones," as they say. We just need to figure out how to leverage them properly.

This is exactly why I keep referring to the work done in Denver. While I realize our parochialism makes that hard, they have identified many different types of stops dependent upon current needs and future projections. They do an individual study for each TOD stop and try to identify the best types and kinds of development. After all, what good is a system that only reaches a select few land uses? Should each municipality with a stop perform their own study, then maybe everyone can be both involved and happy. My worry there is concerning those municipalities that favor poor development and economic practices. This is where we need an overarching planning department...I.E. a regional planning department...one that has the power over land use, zoning and the other planning tools.

Came across a vid about TOD. Thought i would share. Its about 3 mins long.

http://vimeo.com/19836629

New Bi-State executive puts development on a pedestal

BY KEN LEISER • kleiser@post-dispatch.com > 314-340-8215 STLtoday.com | Posted: Friday, April 29, 2011 12:00 am |

Many may overlook that Metro is really just the public transportation brand name of the Bi-State Development Agency. But John Langa knows well that development is quite literally his employer's middle name.

Langa, 48, joined Bi-State on March 14 as its vice president of economic development. He sees Bi-State, which does business as Metro, as a significant player in the region's economic aspirations.

It is already a significant employer in its own right. Its holdings include St. Louis Downtown Airport, the third-busiest airfield in Illinois and home to about 1,500 jobs.

Bringing with him nine years of public sector experience, Langa describes economic development as a "matter of faith," a sort of futures game where the outcome isn't always exactly what you set out to achieve. There is work to be done, for instance, on transit-oriented developments here in St. Louis, he said. But those will require partnership creation, incentives and financing.

link: http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 0becd.html

For those interested:

May 4: Transit Oriented Development Workshop
Demonstrating the ROI for St. Louis
Citizens for Modern Transit presents Transit Oriented Development; Demonstrating the Return on
Investment for St. Louis, Wednesday, May 4, from 7:30 - 10:30 AM, at the BJC Learning Center
Auditorium (lower level) at the Meridian, 8300 Eager Road, St. Louis (adjacent to the Brentwood MetroLink
Station). The workshop will feature Jack Wierzenski, Dallas Area Rapid Transit's (DART) Director of
Economic Development. Invited Panelists include Metro's new Vice President of Economic Development
John Langa; Meridian developer Alan Skop of DCM Development Group; City of Clayton City Manager
Craig Owens; and Tim Keane from SLU's Center for Sustainability. For more information and to register,
go to www.cmt-stl.org/news/todevent.htm.

zun, Metro's TOD planning efforts include the development of station typologies. These are not individual station area plans - to do a station area plan for each of the 37 MetroLink Stations right now is out of reach. However, one end result of the TOD planning process will be some - we're not yet sure how many - detailed station area plans and these typologies.

What is a typology? Why, it's an example of what TOD might look like in different environments. So the typology for a suburban station like Shiloh is going to look different than the typology for a station like Forest Park. It's sort of a best-practices guide. Again at this time we don't know how many different typologies we'll end up with, but the result is that they should help guide the neighborhoods and municipalities around the stations as to what "good" development will look like. Short of a major change in how the St. Louis region is structured politically, I think this is going to be the closest thing we can get to regional planning guidelines. And always remember, these are recommendations - it is not our place to go to a community and tell them "You shall do this and this and that." But if they want it, we want to help them make it happen. Producing these typologies is one way to do that; at least it will start the conversation about what kinds of development people want - and are realistic, and will help support and increase transit use and livability in any given location.

jennifer wrote:zun, Metro's TOD planning efforts include the development of station typologies. These are not individual station area plans - to do a station area plan for each of the 37 MetroLink Stations right now is out of reach. However, one end result of the TOD planning process will be some - we're not yet sure how many - detailed station area plans and these typologies.

What is a typology? Why, it's an example of what TOD might look like in different environments. So the typology for a suburban station like Shiloh is going to look different than the typology for a station like Forest Park. It's sort of a best-practices guide. Again at this time we don't know how many different typologies we'll end up with, but the result is that they should help guide the neighborhoods and municipalities around the stations as to what "good" development will look like. Short of a major change in how the St. Louis region is structured politically, I think this is going to be the closest thing we can get to regional planning guidelines. And always remember, these are recommendations - it is not our place to go to a community and tell them "You shall do this and this and that." But if they want it, we want to help them make it happen. Producing these typologies is one way to do that; at least it will start the conversation about what kinds of development people want - and are realistic, and will help support and increase transit use and livability in any given location.

First, thanks for the response Jennifer.

I am quite aware of TOD typologies and the fact that only recommendations can be made. But that is probably good information for those that didn't know.

As for the identification and determination of TOD typologies, I am glad to hear there is some planning going on in those regards. I would wager that despite the political challenges in STL, there will be people that rally to support the TOD typologies, assuming they are in areas that make sense, are well thought out typologies that respond well to their context and there is ample in depth information about the typologies.

I am curious to know the data model used to identify these stops. I plan on constructing a geospatial model over the next two years that would identify potential TOD sites and their corresponding typologies. I would love to cross-reference that to the efforts performed by METRO. Granted getting the information necessary to construct that model will be huge task.

Building a sustainable region, a community at a time Print E-mail Share
By David Baugher, special to the Beacon
Posted 1:00 pm Sun., 1.8.12

There is an old saying about the best-laid plans, but Jennifer Howland will gladly tell you that no blueprint is one-size-fits-all.

"What we envision is not a plan where everything would be the same no matter which community you are in," she said. "It's more about giving local communities options that they can select from and take steps based on their own sets of priorities to achieve a more sustainable future for their citizens."


Catherine Werner, sustainability director in Mayor Francis Slay's office, said the city is doing transit-oriented development planning related to MetroLink stations, streetscapes and a multi-modal access study for downtown.

Grant partner Metro Transit has been working on transit-oriented development, or TOD.

That is "one of the most critical components of this endeavor," said communication director Dianne Williams via email. "TOD is a planning approach that rethinks how we plan, fund and build our communities in a manner that combines sustainable community planning practices, constructive development partnerships and intelligent transportation solutions."


link: http://www.stlbeacon.org/region/115176- ... -at-a-time

^
^
If thing are really moving forward as well as that article makes it sound, then consider me even more exited about TODs and planning in the STL Metro area!

I would really like to go to those meetings and I would love to contribute in these planning efforts! Sound like a great opportunity for St. Louis.

Its interesting that STL received the third highest amount of funding. They much have done the right things and submitted a solid application.