urbanSTL

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Apr 08, 2022

urban_dilettante wrote: ↑

Apr 07, 2022

^ du jour political ideologies change faster than the human condition. the US is a world outlier in terms of gun violence. the rest of the world has politics too.

This isn't actually true. We're number nine worldwide in terms of firearm violence. Which is horrible, but nothing of an outlier. We're only an outlier for "rich" countries. FirveThirtyEight.com did a nice piece discussing the problem. The risk of firearms deaths for white people is about on par with wealthy countries. For African Americans it's about on par with a poor country in the middle of a civil war. Ultimately, we're not really a developed country anymore. Let's call the United States the "redeveloping world."

I like "undeveloping". And being an outlier for wealthy countries is still an outlier. Or to put it differently, a wealthy country at peace having the same level of gun violence as a countries at war is an outlier.

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Apr 08, 2022

urban_dilettante wrote: ↑

Apr 07, 2022

^ du jour political ideologies change faster than the human condition. the US is a world outlier in terms of gun violence. the rest of the world has politics too.

This isn't actually true. We're number nine worldwide in terms of firearm violence. Which is horrible, but nothing of an outlier. We're only an outlier for "rich" countries. FirveThirtyEight.com did a nice piece discussing the problem. The risk of firearms deaths for white people is about on par with wealthy countries. For African Americans it's about on par with a poor country in the middle of a civil war. Ultimately, we're not really a developed country anymore. Let's call the United States the "redeveloping world."

yes, of course. but i meant in comparison to other wealthy, "developed" countries.

Video: Did man confess to police carjacking attempt?

https://fox2now.com/news/fox-files/vide ... g-attempt/

The solution: more road closures to add to the 1,000 closures in the greater downtown riverfront area.

The south end of Lenore K Sullivan will ... be secured by the existing gate and no cars will be allowed on Lenore K Sullivan after 7:00 P.M

https://www.kmov.com/2022/04/13/slmpd-w ... ng-deaths/

eee123 wrote: ↑

Apr 14, 2022

The solution: more road closures to add to the 1,000 closures in the greater downtown riverfront area.

The south end of Lenore K Sullivan will ... be secured by the existing gate and no cars will be allowed on Lenore K Sullivan after 7:00 P.M

https://www.kmov.com/2022/04/13/slmpd-w ... ng-deaths/

I honestly wouldn't mind if they permanently closed the street to vehicles for the stretch in front of the arch. Only open it for pedestrians, cyclists, and maybe the carriages. Could still have food trucks or other concessions along there, but any concessions that need public vehicle access could be stationed closer to Laclede's Landing.

I wouldn't mind that either. When it was packed with cars and buses, there really wasn't enough room for pedestrians along LKS, what with the sidewalk kind of being encroached upon by decorative lighting and benches.

I'm just still surly that the floodwall/Ashley Energy fence by the Landing will apparently never be opened to connect our fancy new-ish bike trail to the Riverfront Trail. And I'm assuming they'll bring back that concert series that added another pedestrian/bike closure. And Lumiere is seemingly building a new street gate every week.

A lot of vroom, vroom, pow, pow, pow tonight.

Hundreds of chargers and cars blocking broadway in Soulard and caused massive traffic jams. The cars were even going opposite direction of traffic. People were on top of their cars. Cops were at the scene but I hadn’t noticed that ever before especially living at Ann and Broadway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I saw the same thing on Kingshighway. Started at Forest Park Parkway and went North from there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^There was apparently some kind of drift/burnout/donut rally up at Riverview and 270. I expect this was all associated.

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

Apr 26, 2022

Perhaps similar rules in place here might be beneficia

Not a bad start but it seems to shut out people who live in a smaller house or in an area that prohibits AirBnBs. The idea of owner-occupant sounds good but to make it a requirement seems unrealistic.

^I'd allow for the possibility that you could have more or be from out of town if your AirBnB follows all the usual hotel rules and simply uses AirBnB as a way to generate hotel nights. Essentially, I'd permit hotels to book via AirBnB and its competitors. (I've seen hotel rooms on  VRBO in Europe, at least. Booked a couple like that, even.) But if you're not going to follow the usual hotel regulations the above regs sound pretty reasonable. They'd prevent m medium to large landlords from trying to go big as hoteliers while skirting taxes and regulations, which seems to be the problem here. Obviously hotels aren't a problem. And rental property isn't a problem. But sometimes when one acts like the other there's a problem. (Especially if you're dodging the rules of one or both.)

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

Apr 26, 2022

Perhaps similar rules in place here might be beneficial:

How would this affect multi-unit Airbnbs? For example, I just stayed at an Airbnb in KC that was basically a hostel. There were 20 rooms in the place, all of which were listed on Airbnb. Would that count as 1 or 20 under these rules?

I'd say that should count as 20 - unless the owner wants to get a hotel license and follow all the applicable laws that would come with it. 

^That sounds like the way to do it. And that'd require at least minimal staff on site and available 24/7. (Rather like a hotel.)

Unfortunately, I’m under the impression that the alder responds more to building owners than building residents.

Although AirBnB may create headache, I don’t know if the building owners will be up for limiting use. Who knows if there are any buildings downtown where the investment is propped up using AirBnB investments.

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Apr 28, 2022

^That sounds like the way to do it. And that'd require at least minimal staff on site and available 24/7. (Rather like a hotel.)

Tbf, the owner of the Airbnb/hostel lived there full time. So, it very well may have satisfied any requirements.

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 28, 2022

Unfortunately, I’m under the impression that the alder responds more to building owners than building residents.

Although AirBnB may create headache, I don’t know if the building owners will be up for limiting use. Who knows if there are any buildings downtown where the investment is propped up using AirBnB investments.

I believe I've had the opportunity to tour at least one property where projected AirBnB revenues helped to make the project happen. I don't want to see them banned, but reasonable regulation is probably not unwarranted. Smaller ones could work like a more traditional Bed and Breakfast and larger ones like hotels. I think the code is there to make this work more safely. But I do think it would be most fair if everyone is on the same playing field, paying into the system at the same rate, making the same contribution to improving our city. That said, you're quite right, they've made a real contribution to restoration. I'm pretty sure there are quite a few small to middling projects that wouldn't have happened without that. Maybe even some fairly big ones.

1/3 of the year complete homicide report

2022: 51 counted + 1 justified = 52 total
2021: 62 counted + 5 justified = 67 total

-22%