urbanSTL

It's too bad there is SECTION 8 in this building. what kind of regular, young people will move into a building like this?

The building has rented apartments to some veterans enrolled in one of St. Patrick Center's programs. If these vets weren't actually INSIDE the building, they would likely be sleeping outside it in an alley, without the intensive structure the program provides.



As a longtime downtown resident, I don't have any problem with subsidized neighbors. After all, University Lofts (mixed income), Merchandise Mart (mixed income), and Art Lofts (completely income restricted) have produced some great neighbors.

markinlondon wrote:I prefer the economic diversity myself. Maybe I'm different, but for me, it's not about protecting my property value. It's more about living in an interesting neighborhood (Of course everyone has a different idea of an interesting neighborhood). That's why I chose to buy a loft in the city. I've made friends with residents at Plaza Square from Brazil, Ethiopia, Colombia, Uganda, Tanzania and India. They all support the restaurants and bars along Washington. It's sad that you find it depressing. Your probably not the "kind of person" I would hang out with though anyway. By the way, I prefer you speak your mind rather than worrying about being PC. American has become overly PC.

Who said I found it depressing, I just sad that nobody wants to build a hi-rise ghetto. We don't want to turn Washington Ave into Pruitt-Igoe and for your information I'm actually a strong advocate of socialization (meaning I do think we have a moral obligation to care and respect our fellow man), but in all honesty America is a hardcore capitalistic society and it will become harder and harder to convince people to invest in downtown's future, if the have the perception that its overran with homeless people. Whether its politically correct or not, people with money don't like to see poor people and we need people with money to invest in downtown.

I want downtown to succeed as well, but if people with money don't like to see poor people then they need to get over it. It's not like downtown is overrun with Section 8 housing anyway, this is just one building. Plus, I thought part of the urban idea was having a walkable life where there wasn't a need to drive out to the county or other parts of the city on a regular basis for everyday things. Besides the higher paying jobs in the downtown area, there are definitely lower paying jobs that help keep things running, as there are everywhere. However, if the people with these jobs don't have affordable living nearby and instead have to drive in to work, then part of the urban idea isn't being met. It needs to work for everyone, not just the people with money who don't want to be around poor people, and they are going to have to learn to deal with it.

Your probably not the "kind of person" I would hang out with though anyway.

awesome quote MarkinLondon...



I'm all for veterans having a place to stay and live. I just think its a sad state when the only people that will fill the building are people that the Landlord gets to use for guaranteed government funds to pay rents that the free market is not currently supporting. Filling buildings with homeless people will put the brakes on demand from wealthier backgrounds, which are the ones that shop at all the hip retail stores I hear people clamoring for on this site. Certainly, I can understand a mix of people downtown to keep it "gritty" and "hip" (that's for you Mark, ya little stud! ) I'm sure plenty of potential residents of the SkyHouse didn't think Jerry Rice's Shelter was the "hip grit" that others apparently want to live next to so badly.

I think I just had a bad hangover the day I wrote that. Just missing my London days.

(goat314, I didn't say you found it depressing, I think it was the post before you)



Anyway, looking forward to the diner opening in this building!

Probably not anytime soon.

I received this from a friend who lives and works downtown. I no longer live downtown, but would attend the meeting if I did:



There is a public meeting that is occurring next Thursday, February 19th, at 7 PM at St. Patrick Center on Tucker Avenue (just north of Lucas) related to the Washington Avenue Apartments (the former Days’ Inn at Tucker and Washington). The point of the meeting is to gain resident feedback on a plan by St. Patrick Center to lease 45 of the 95 apartment units at the Washington Avenue Apartments for placement of 45 chronically homeless veterans with chemical dependency, mental illness, or both.



I personally as a resident have many issues related to this plan that relate to the lack of resident input into the plan (or even notification it existed), the lack of a license to operate such a facility, best practices related to facilities such as this, and many other factors. Others, including friends and neighbors, disagree with my personal opinion. There are certainly reasons to support this facility or something like it, from the long and mutually beneficial relationship between Downtown and St. Patrick Center to the potential life changes that may be seen in the homeless tenants of this facility. However, I would be remiss not to note that the Downtown Community Improvement District Board of Directors voted almost unanimously (one abstention) to advocate against this facility. But, I don’t want to debate the merits of this issue in this electronic venue. That is not the purpose of this email.



The purpose of this email is to strongly encourage you to attend the meeting and add your voice to the debate. This meeting is specifically designed to solicit your opinion on this matter as Downtown residents. You have an opportunity, and in my opinion, an obligation to speak up and be heard on this matter. Downtown’s residents have often been voiceless on many matters that affect our quality of life, our property values, and our community. This is an opportunity to start changing that, irrespective of your opinion on the merits of this situation. I urge you to come to the meeting, become educated on this matter, and express your opinion one way or the other. Your absence will signal your consent to this facility (without your input) and to the status quo of an often ignored resident community.

^ Interesting...



I have nothing else to do this thursday, so i might stop by.



I guess my main concerns are the following:

1. Who will the other 50 units be rented to? I mean who would want to live in a building that could pose such a danger. I am afraid we are taking away units that could be filled with active downtown residents that have a lower income. Not even they would want to live here now.

2. Is there really no other place to house these vets? What about that San Luis apartment complex?

3. Where do they currently sleep now?



I just think housing chronically ill in a dense urban environment, may not be the best thing. But someone can provide a good enough arguement and I may swing the other way.

gosh..what do you do here...?



Seems to me that this would be project suicide. I mean, what developer would want these types as tenants? I, for one, wouldn't want to live with "chronically homeless veterans with chemical dependency, mental illness, or both."



Not all that different than the Mark Twain.



You like to think of Low Income Housing Credits as providing affordable places to live within the neighborhood for people in the service industry, teachers, etc. This wouldn't be your target demo.

I think anyone who can attend this meeting should. If you cannot attend maybe contact the Wash Ave Apts or the St Patricks Center to voice your concerns. The problem I have is that by renting half of the units to this demographic is way to high of a concentration people who are experiencing life issues. Bad dogs run together and once they hand out together the same issues that have had issues with could resurface if just one person falls off the wagon. If they lived in a more spead out area instead of sich a high concentration will only create issues in saftey, attractivness of the neighborhood and the project itself.



The mission we established when the redevelopment of Wash Ave started was to attract young individuals and empty nesters in a middle to high income class without losing focus on diversity. This act would breech and disrupt what downtown is trying to accomplish.



The individuals proposing this need to ask themselves "would theny want this type of development in their neighborhood"? I think the majority would answer would "No".



Please attend and keep this in mind.

Right organization, Wrong place.

BTW sorry for all the typos. I was in a hurry.

Will you be telling a veteran to their face tonight that you don't want them as neighbors? It's easy to talk like this to your buddies or on an internet board but St. Patricks Center has earned the respect of all of us and now we are turning on them too? In EVERY single thread about homelessness and the park, etc. all of the bashers constantly point to St. patricks Center and how Larry should run his organization like them. There may be more to this than this obviously one sided letter states. They said from the beginning that there was going to be veteran housing at the Apts. Correct me if I am wrong, but there may already be guys living there. If so, any problems yet?

I'll stand with ChrisInDownTown on this.



There are already vets living there as part of the St. Patrick Center program. Every resident pays rent, participates in a range of service programs, and HAS A JOB in one of the sorts of sectors some posters here have mentioned. So far, I have met a restaurant worker, a telemarketer, and a musician. Every resident is an honorably discharged veteran of the armed services, suggesting to me some accomplishment on their part and -- I believe -- a certain moral obligation on mine.



Were they not in this St. Patrick Center program it is likely that they would be in Peter & Paul (if they were lucky), New Life (if they were not), or under the loading dock of a building backing onto a Washington Ave. alley.

Glad you all brought that up. It's important to understanding who exactly we're talking about.... before this all we knew was....

to lease 45 of the 95 apartment units at the Washington Avenue Apartments for placement of 45 chronically homeless veterans with chemical dependency, mental illness, or both.

I feel similarly to ChrisInDownTown as well. These people sacrificed for the rest of us. I could have joined the armed forces to defend the country, but I choose to do other things in life. Thus, instead I rely on the brave folks who do fight for and defend us and I want them to be able to rely on me. In some of the cases their mental illness, etc. may have even been caused by their time in the service. These people need to live somewhere and I don't feel right telling them they should live by someone else instead of me.



For me the other important thing is that this is proposed by the Saint Patrick Center, as opposed to say Larry Rice. Unlike Rice, the Saint Patrick Center has proven they can handle things like this responsibly and I know of no history of problems regarding them. Thus, I give them the benefit of the doubt that they can handle this.

This is not a new plan. We knew about this about a year ago, if I remember correctly. It was discussed then, probably in this thread. I don't have a problem with this, since it seems like the management is good.

I agree with what many of you have said so far.



At first I had mixed feelings about the news, mostly because I would've liked a strong mix of tenants in that building. However, I have no idea about the current tenants or occupancy rate, so I cannot see how there would necessairly be a significant negative impact on the property or the surrounding area.



Also, I couldn't agree more about the need to welcome these people into the downtown community. I am quite grateful for their service to our country, they are working to turn their lives around, and I have a great deal of faith in Saint Patrick Center's ability to help these people make the transition into better living.



As Publiceye and others have said, if not here, then where?



I just hope those that have questions for Saint Patrick Center are mindful of the positive role that this organization plays in our community, sensitive to the needs of the people that the organization hopes to help through this plan, and most of all, respectful to everyone involved in the process.

As a psychiatrist who has treated veterans who are involved in programs such as this, I can attest to the fact that they are heavily invested in programming when they are in this VA-supported housing. They all have individuals therapists and individual psychiatrists, and if they have substance abuse issues, then they are involved in either ATP (Addiction Treatment Program) or DDTC (Drug Dependency Treatment Clinic). Many are also involved in supportive group therapy (either for substance abusers or related to their primary psychiatric diagnosis). When veterans are approved to live in this housing, they have will have demonstrated commitment to their ongoing psychiatric care and cessation of substance abuse. These programs are selective, and are meant to re-integrate the veterans into the community in a thoughtful and step-wise fashion. These are not programs where someone can walk into the Midtown VA and say "I'm homless and addicted to cocaine...can I stay at Washington and Tucker?"



That said, I can certainly understand the hesitation on the part of many downtown residents. When you put "mentally ill" and "chemical dependency issues" together, it can be volatile--but the VA insures that steps are put into place to address issues and concerns as they arise. And with St. Patrick's Center as a partner, the chances of success are much greater than either alone.