urbanSTL

SouthCityJR wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

I hate to say this as a native St. Louisan who loves this town, but is there any chance Downtown's lack of vibrancy despite all of the developments mentioned is due to the nature of St. Louisans themselves? Yes, I agree that Downtown is dead and lacking energy most of the time, but I've worked in downtown Clayton for years and can assure you Clayton is every bit as dead as Downtown when it comes to measuring vibrancy. Exact same issues...you only see people out very briefly during lunch time. After dark, Pastaria is busy and so are some of the other restaurants but there isn't much activity on the streets. Overall similar problems to Downtown, despite Clayton having huge investments and massive growth in the number of office workers over the years. My point is that maybe more workers Downtown would help (surely can't hurt), but don't expect them to produce any miracles based on what I see in Clayton.

Is there a chance the real issue boils down to the culture of St. Louis? People here seem to want to drive to work, park in a garage, go to their office, then go home at 5:00 pm sharp. No hanging around a coffee shop outside the office at 10 a.m. or getting drinks after work. No going home then back to the area where you work for a late dinner (no late dinners at all actually...ever been to other cities and notice how restaurants are still busy at 9 p.m.?). We seem to hate hanging out where we work and prefer to hang out where we live...i.e. we are a town of neighborhoods. Go to other cities both smaller and larger than us and you do see people who like to hang out where they work, but not here. I'm not sure why StL is this way, but we are.

No I don't think it's the "people" per se, I think the many St. Louisans (particularly the youthful ones) leave St. Louis and go to other cities to do that very thing. In my opinion, St. Louis is generally a city that lacks vision and thinks our strength are in the suburban, "low cost", family oriented, bs narrative. Leadership in general seems not to be interest in having a vibrant city, they like the cowtown narrative, so many locals that want a vibrant urban experience simply leave St. Louis all together. What I can't seem to understand is why we can't do both! We have great bedroom communities for families, but we really haven't pushed "city living" in the region.

debaliviere wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

STLrainbow wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

Curious what major downtowns you think are below ours.

Buffalo. Actually, Buffalo is pretty similar, IIRC. We're about even.

That's the entire list for me.

Tampa and Jacksonville have horrible downtowns too. Places like Memphis area also lackluster, but we shouldn't be comparing ourselves to smaller metros.

^ exactly. I'm not sure we pull above any cities above ours, with the exception of maybe Tampa. And we're below almost all that have a population of say 2M or above. (And two of those, Orlando and Vegas, are different animals alltogether.)

Mark Groth wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

Downtown Milwaukee is no better or worse than our's, same for Louisville.

I beg to differ on Milwaukee - it's nicer than STL. I give downtown Louisville a slight edge over our downtown.

Mark Groth wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

Downtown Milwaukee is no better or worse than our's, same for Louisville. Remember we are small city, with a population the size of Wichita.

I've lived & worked in both Downtown Milwaukee and Downtown St. Louis. I prefer downtown Milwaukee - you got a usuable river, a usuable lake and downtown Milwaukee isnt surrounded by nothing like our downtown, it pretty nicely translates to a neighborhoods on the North and south side.

The highways down there are terrible, but the lakefront park and the access to the summerfest grounds are pretty nice.

Again, most of the other cities don't have two "downtowns" competing against each other like we do. Downtown STL would be a whole different animal today if Clayton had never happened.

debaliviere wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

STLrainbow wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

Curious what major downtowns you think are below ours.

Buffalo. Actually, Buffalo is pretty similar, IIRC. We're about even.

That's the entire list for me.

Ouch... Then recollections of Buffalo 66's intro scenes... Double ouch... Maybe it's changed for the better since 98.

framer wrote: ↑

Oct 19, 2017

Again, most of the other cities don't have two "downtowns" competing against each other like we do. Downtown STL would be a whole different animal today if Clayton had never happened.

True, except that neither of our downtowns are vibrant. Both completely lack retail and the foot traffic that it generates. Milwaukee's downtown is significantly more vibrant than ours, due in part to the Third Ward with all of its great retail and the associated foot traffic. Heck, Milwaukee's downtown is busier than ours despite the fact that the Brewers stadium isn't even in downtown, it's in an area a few miles outside of it. If they had the ballpark downtown, they'd crush us. Also, last time I was there, I went to dinner in a restaurant downtown, then walked to some bars on the other side of downtown and actually encountered tons of people along the way. People actually get out of their cars and walk around in that town. In fairness, it may have had something to do with it being a beautiful weather summer evening. I'd bet a cold winter night would have produced a different outcome.

City Foundry will hopefully add some nice retail to the City in general, but it still won't be in walking distance from Downtown, so we won't get the same benefits as the Third Ward provides in Milwaukee. It will be just another area that people drive in and out of.

^But if our two downtowns were somehow merged into one, then we'd have that elusive "critical mass" which could support retail. Think of all the Clayton towers with all of their workers dropped into Downtown STL.

Saw this on fb and it reminded me of this thread. Paric is located in Westport here but just open a satellite office in downtown KC. Somehow we need to make downtown more desirable to St. Louis businesses.

The Landing needs to develop a form based code and quickly.

I may get pounced on for this, but I really think Downtown St Louis is nice. I’ve not once heard someone say our downtown core is gross. I always find the CBD to be very clean compared to other downtowns. Yes, downtown lacks. But it’s certainly the “worst”. I’d say our downtown is very similar to Cleveland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Few things being left out of this conversation. First off, Goat, I couldn't agree more with your comments about the unsightly abandoned buildings, gang tags and lack of weed and trash control. Looks awful on 70 and 44 looks rough in the City. A lot of this is on MODOT for not doing weed/trash control and replacing crumbling barriers and infrastructure. Another culprit is the railroad corps. that do a disgraceful job of keeping bridges free of gang tags and rust. The train bridges Downtown look horrible! There has to be some way to force them to fix them up. Some look structurally dangerous.

Now, back to my main point. Downtown STL is surrounded by 2 of the most impoverished and decaying areas in the Midwest. ESTL and NSTL. Downtown's location in reference to those areas will naturally create more crime problems and hurt overall regional and national perception. This fact makes it harder for Downtown to succeed IMO. We need to solve some of these issues in those areas. Quite a challenge! I've just never understood how the region hasn't put Downtown on lockdown. I feel extremely safe in a lot of Big cities at all hours of the night. Police presence everywhere. Downtown STL doesn't always have that feel. Lock down downtown, do some cosmetic housecleaning at least along highways visitors pass through. That's a less expensive way to change the feel, along with the LED light poles and security cameras. Those improvements can go a long way.

I just wish downtown had one concentrated place to start from. Even for downtown it seems spread out. You have the ballpark in one spot with ballpark village and then a bunch of blocks of mostly nothing until you get to Wash Ave. The Arena/Union Station is in another zone surrounded by nothing (and a lot of stuff that can't even be redone to give it a path to the other areas). You aren't redoing the post office, city hall or the police station to any kind of thing that will help night life. So it is on its own island cut off by those and the parks to the north. Even Laclede's Landing is cut off by Eads and the dome from the rest of downtown.

Wash ave 5 years ago really had something going that I thought could start something. 14th to MX. Then I was hoping it could spread south to the stadium but it never happened. You have residential sprinkled in now, which is great, but on the first floor it is either vacant commercial or places that close down after lunch.

At this point I am hoping ballpark village can roll into that area that has Flying Saucer/Tin roof/Wheelhouse/Start Bar. That can then move north. Again it is blocked by hotels and parking garages though.

There are just to many dead zones between everything that hurt it. People aren't wanting to walk through zones of nothing at night. In my option there aren't enough patio/open window bars/restaurants that give that fun vibe and are inviting to the street.

With the new residents downtown I thought things would be picking up a little faster than they are at the moment.

Downtown needs a significant investments in its streets and small business's. It help by down sizing Tucker Blvd rebuilding of streets and turning some of them into 2 ways. Planting healthier more sturdier trees instead of the horrible pear trees. Better lighting easier signage and lets dead zones as stated.
Offering healthy progressive incentives for small business's and giving them a chance to stay and grow. Theres foot traffic however theres nothing really keeping people interested.
Also need to be significant investment in security people want to feel safe and not have to always look back to see if someone is hauling at them.

I can go on about how awful 70 looks coming through St.Louis thats the main highway that needs to be rebuilt other than that despite the north St.Louis blight there are more pristine areas in the city that are clean and beautiful.

This all turns to Downtown STL Inc. When downtown is in the state it currently is, there shouldn’t be a 30 person staff. Nearly all of that revenue should be going to beautification and security. They spent and ungodly amount of money on color changing LEDs, when parts of downtown don’t even have adequate lighting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Oct 20, 2017

This all turns to Downtown STL Inc. When downtown is in the state it currently is, there shouldn’t be a 30 person staff. Nearly all of that revenue should be going to beautification and security. They spent and ungodly amount of money on color changing LEDs, when parts of downtown don’t even have adequate lighting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Right?

Priorities in my opinion:
-High police visibility and engagement. Not just driving around, but more walking and biking cops. Even just posting up.
-Fill storefronts. If we're giving up subsidies to every developer and their cousin, I think we should do the same or better for small businesses to gain a foothold in Downtown. Or incentives for them to stay open later or something. Just something to boost small business, especially south of Washington.
-New lighting around downtown. Those cobra lights, even if they have new bulbs, are absolutely horrible looking. Fixtures can really change the way we perceive our environment. And please god, not the daylight balanced LED's.

I would highly suggest sending all these critiques directly to Downtown Inc. All of you have presented some incredible solutions. I’m sure they’d be receptive


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chalupas54 wrote: ↑

Oct 20, 2017

I may get pounced on for this, but I really think Downtown St Louis is nice. I’ve not once heard someone say our downtown core is gross. I always find the CBD to be very clean compared to other downtowns. Yes, downtown lacks. But it’s certainly the “worst”. I’d say our downtown is very similar to Cleveland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I completely agree. It could definitely be better, but speaking in hyperbole about how "it's the worst in the US" is crazy and wrong.

A few simple moves over the years would have created a planned environment downtown that encouraged even more private investment.

Sure, we have successes, current and past: Washington AVE streetscape where much private investment followed; every building on Washington AVE; Old Post Office; new hotels, etc. etc. However, we could have A LOT MORE going on downtown w/ better planning including form-based code, 20/80 federal matches leveraging our CID dollars for streetscapes & true bike/ped lanes (more later), etc.

Where you have good use of public dollars (CID money), private investment follows, particularly in well-planned infrastructure projects (lighting; sidewalks; bike/ped; ...).

You cannot fix downtown until you fix Downtown St. Louis Inc (DSI).

Missy Kelley currently runs DSI.

You cannot fix DSI until you fix its largest fundraiser, the downtown Community Improvement District (CID).

The CID is an extra layer of government property owners self-imposed on themselves because the City couldn't get sh*t done.

Pretty sad right?

We taxed ourselves AGAIN, above the real estate taxes we pay our City, because our existing City government services weren't enough. We taxed ourselves AGAIN to get better services in downtown.

I understand in a shrinking city (shrinking tax base) this is necessary -- to tax ourselves again -- but the CID/DSI has been blowing our extra taxes for years now. And when I say "blowing" I mean they have been pissing the money away. In fact, I believe the CID/DSI steals projects and ideas from people and half-ass implements them to look like they're getting sh*t done because that's how they justify keeping their jobs -- they have to do it that way, they don't have any urban-planning experience on their DSI staff.

Even if Missy Kelley wanted to, she could not fix the CID which funds her DSI.

As reported by Nick Pistor years ago in a few articles in the Post Dispatch, the DSI & CID boards are both VERY large and they are intertwined (Missy has begun trying to unwind some of this only after a few of us downtowners started asking questions this year) -- meaning, there are MANY decision-makers and MANY conflicts of interests within the CID-DSI relationship.

Here are links to the DSI & CID boards -- look at how LARGE they are -- this makes it very difficult to get anything done (much like our region we have too many chiefs within our downtown -- and no real leaders):

DSI's massive board: http://www.downtownstl.org/about-downto ... inc/board/

CID's massive board: http://www.downtownstl.org/downtown-cid/board/

***If you want to fix downtown you need a CID that looks like this:

-13 - 17 board members composed only of persons paying the CID assessment/tax -- this way, you have commercial property owners & condo owners that "feel the pain" of paying the CID assessment making decisions. You want people that feel that pain because they are going to actively pursue best use of CID dollars;

-you want 13 - 17 CID board members because you'll probably get quorum every time -- and it's harder to manipulate a small, engaged CID board. As it stands right now, it's easy to come into the CID board meetings and say "hey I'm a developer and I know what I'm doing so back my project/ideas ..." You don't want one or two self-interested guys/gals manipulating the board. You want an engaged CID board that talks and really thinks about what's best for all of downtown. You also want an odd number of board members so you can't have tie votes;

-you need REAL board term limits. You don't want the same 13 - 17 men & women making decisions for downtown in perpetuity. Right now when you term out at the CID you can float over to DSI's board, then, you can float back to the CID, then back to DSI ... it's ridiculous. If you're connected, you can stay on the boards forever, forever influencing decision-making. It's dotarded;

-other not-for-profit best practices apply (the recommendations are out there).***

If you had a FUNCTIONAL CID board you no longer would have to worry about DSI -- because you could better direct how you want the CID money spent each year -- and if DSI didn't spend it well -- you could hire Park Central Development or, like many CIDs, you simply manage the CID money w/in the CID itself.

Currently, and get ready for this -- maybe you should sit down --

... the CID MUST HIRE DSI.

How the ***** does that work?

So, the CID collects a sh*t TON of money each year ($3,000,000 per year??), and the CID MUST give it to Missy & crew. Meaning, the CID cannot even seek competitive bids from, say, Park Central Development or Brad Waldrop.

I just threw my name out there because maybe I know how to best spend the $3,000,000 and can get a lot more done. Maybe. Trust me, I don't want the job. But I do want to fix the CID so we can spend our money right. If you really know downtown and you look around, there's not enough going on. That's because of poor planning. And good planning requires good use of CID dollars.

The CID COULD HAVE used a portion of their $30,000,000 - $50,000,000 collected over the years toward 20/80 federal matches, where the feds give you 80% toward an infrastructure project if you put up 20%. THE FEDS GIVE YOU THAT MONEY -- it's not a loan. Yes, we could have leveraged annual CID dollars and gotten more bang for our buck.

An example of a 20/80 federal match is Washington AVE Phase III where Spinnaker, Stifel etc put up a local match of 20% and the feds put up 80% to bring you new lights, sidewalks etc in front of MX. To break that down in example dollars, we put up $200,000 and the feds give us $800,000 and boom, we now have a $1,000,000 project.

Instead the CID has been pissing $200,000 away on non-experienced staff (DSI). I mean, these people have zero urban-planning experience.

Now that I've written this I'll bet anyone out there $100 that you'll hear about the CID/DSI doing a 20/80 federal match project in the next 6 months. My guess is it will be for a BPV-MX connector.

The CID COULD HAVE had form-based code in place by now. Of course, that was in the works until Missy stopped it.

The CID COULD HAVE done a lot of things with tens of millions of dollars but instead the CID is not functional: it's comprised of people that do and don't pay the CID assessment/tax -- the CID is too large -- and worse, the CID has to give its annual income to DSI.

Something doesn't smell right here. If you want to join a growing group of people that wishes to change the CID feel free to text me at 314-280-6646 and I'll put you on our list. You can try emailing me too but my spam filters are strong: bw@bradwaldrop.com

The only path forward is to fix the CID bylaws, which may require not renewing the existing CID -- and passing a new ordinance outlining a CID that follows not-for-profit best practices.

When clicking on the above linked boards note that there are four aldermen involved. I've reached out to these aldermen and they ignore me on this issue -- probably because there are self-interested board members, like myself (we are ALL self-interested), that are donors. And until we publicize this CID-problem the aldermen won't lead. So St. Louis.