Sustainable Transportation? Not Without a Land Use Policy

By Scott Ogilvie, 24th Ward Alderman, City of St. Louis

St. Louis has a transportation problem, but it may not be the one you think. The region doesn’t have enough people to continue paying for the transportation infrastructure we’ve already built. Fueled by a MoDOT spending binge over the last decade, the region expanded its road capacity to near the highest per capita in the nation.

While total miles driven within the region declined over a decade and population barely grew, we added capacity. Traffic congestion declined while commute times increased. How is that possible? Jobs are moving farther away from where people live. The region’s transportation and land use plans are woefully at odds.

It’s more accurate to say there is no regional land use plan. Hundreds of local governments in the eight-county region, and the counties themselves, control their own land use planning via tax policy, incentives, housing, and zoning regulations. Land use rarely dovetails with existing transportation infrastructure in a way that gets the most value out of what has already been built. Instead, the region built expensive new infrastructure to low-density areas. Our uncoordinated transportation and land use policies might best be characterized by the phrase, “Build and abandon.”

While we don’t like to admit it, in a region with very slow population and job growth, transportation projects are often a zero sum game. A project that helps one area often hurts another. The population growth in St. Charles County over the last two decades was driven by road and bridge investments across the Missouri River like the Page Ave. Extension and Highway 370. (Cost for all three phases of the Page Avenue Extension was $569.2 million.) But growth in St. Charles County came at the expense of population and job declines in north St. Louis County.

Sprawl may be inevitable in a region with population growth, but the paradigm is different in St. Louis. Our region has expanded in geographic size by 400% over 50 years while population grew only 50%. Families in areas with declining population have often seen their personal assets wiped out by declining property values. The depopulation in north St. Louis that began in 1950’s had taken hold in north St. Louis County by the 1990’s.

A study just published by the Brookings Institute of the 96 largest metro areas in the county puts St. Louis’ job and land use pattern in a stark light. Between 2000 and 2012, proximity to jobs in the region declined by 15%. That means the average resident has to travel farther to work than they did just a decade ago. In poor neighborhoods, proximity to jobs declined almost twice as much, by 28%. In both these scores St. Louis is near the bottom nationwide. Our transportation policy is making it harder for everyone to get to work, and particularly so for people who are already poor.

We need to better use the transportation system we’ve already built, directing residential and commercial development to areas where underutilized transportation infrastructure exists. Unfortunately, there’s currently no regional mechanism to achieve this. Hundreds of municipalities within the eight counties retain the ability to set their own priorities and pursue their own development practices, even when it undermines other parts of the region.

Absent a region-wide framework for land use planning, the most likely way to achieve a more sustainable transportation system is simply a reduction in transportation spending from the state. A fiscally restrained MoDOT will have no choice but to limit system expansions in the region. If system growth plateaus for long enough, underutilized areas stand a better chance of rebounding.

While there are no doubt better policy solutions to achieve a sustainable transportation funding and maintenance paradigm in St. Louis, one that merges transportation investment decisions with land use planning, our political climate and fragmentation means we aren’t likely to achieve them. Absent real reform, spending much less on system expansion is the most likely path to a financially sustainable system given the region’s sluggish population growth, low immigration, and aging population.

In addition, East West Gateway, MoDOT, and local governments throughout the region should work harder to determine how to reduce overall demand for transportation. How can jobs, services, and amenities be located where people already live and where we’ve already built infrastructure? “System Preservation”, is a concept already embedded in transportation planning, it should be expanded to include “Neighborhood Preservation.” We should carefully consider how new transportation projects may hurt existing communities. We have abundant data that we’ve overbuilt our highway system, now is the perfect chance to pivot to a more sustainable approach going forward.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the views of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

More Recommendations for Improving Police-Community Relations

By Terrell Carter

Terrell Carter is the Executive Director of the North Newstead Association in St. Louis, MO.  Prior to that, he served as a St. Louis City Police Officer for five years.  He is the author of the forthcoming book Walking the Blue Line: A Police Officer Turned Community Activist Provides Solutions to the Racial Divide.  You can learn more about the book at www.terrellcarter.net.

Much of the attention related to the current conversation about police-citizen interactions focuses on what law enforcement is not doing well.  Realizing that the current tensions that exist are not solely the fault of law enforcement, I offer the following suggestions for consideration by those who are concerned with how we all can work better together.

People who want to help officers do their jobs better can attend a local police department’s Citizen on Patrol Academy or Citizens Police Academy.  During these academies, citizens are given a glimpse into what it is like to be an officer, how a 911 call is dispatched, and what officers are looking for when they conduct their investigations.

Citizens can also learn what laws are relevant to their particular city, as well as gain a better understanding of the rights and responsibilities of both citizens and law enforcement.  If possible, I would also recommend that citizens participate in a ride along.  There is nothing like seeing and hearing a situation from an officer’s point of view inside a patrol car.

On a more practical level, citizens have the opportunity to teach each other how to properly interact with law enforcement.  We should remind each other that officers do have a certain level of authority at all times.  When a policeman gives a person an appropriate legal command, that command should be followed, not challenged.  Hopefully the reader noticed that I said “appropriate legal command”.  I do not advocate or defend officers who arrive on the scene and start out by busting heads and then asking questions.

Community members can also remind each other to always keep their hands where an officer can see them.  If people hide their hands, whether on purpose or accident, an officer will likely think that they are reaching for something to cause them bodily harm.

Realizing that, for various reasons, there are not enough officers patrolling neighborhoods and the officers who are on patrol can’t fix every problem in a neighborhood, citizens can participate in a local Neighborhood Ownership Model (NOM) Plan.  A NOM plan is a flexible, community-based approach for creating and implementing ideas that lead to significant and lasting crime reduction in neighborhoods.  It is volunteer driven and incorporates cooperation from various city departments.  In summary, a NOM plan consists of the following aspects:

• A Neighborhood Planning Team that leads the efforts to create and implement the plan.

• Citizen Patrol Units that are made of residents who volunteer to patrol streets in order to record and report crime.

• Regular Community Meetings that are organized by neighbors in order to provide education, information, and facilitate interaction between government agencies and the community.

• Neighborhood Victim Support Teams made up of trained neighbors that help victims of crimes to ensure they have the support they need to manage through the legal system and the emotional experience that follows.

More information about creating and implementing a NOM plan can be found at http://www.circuitattorney.org/NeighborhoodOwnershipModel.aspx.

Finally, as much as I appreciate those who report the news and willingly put themselves in harms’ way in order to make sure the rest of the world can get a glimpse into events that affect us all, in my estimation, sometimes media outlets are more interested in pushing an agenda or a controversial opinion as it relates to police and citizens than in providing accurate information about incidents that occur.

In the rush to be the first on the scene, or to get the first sound bite, or to capture the most dramatic image, media may move with less care than usual, and instead of giving correct information, they may engage in reporting that doesn’t give the full information that is needed.

As media outlets seek to participate in the process of healing racial and societal divides, they can practice reporting information that more clearly informs the general public instead of pushing sound bites that serve to separate and pit people against one another.  In practicing clearer journalistic reporting, the opportunity becomes available to cause less harm among groups that already have enough reasons to not work together.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

Low-Income Renters Need Energy Efficient Housing

By Dana Gray

Dana Gray serves as the Community Outreach Coordinator for Tower Grove Neighborhoods Community Development Corp. She began her work in community development in 2005 with the Southwest Garden Neighborhood Association. Dana is an art consultant, location scout, beekeeper, and advocate for sustainability issues.  She routinely commutes by bicycle and has a keen interest in our built environment supporting active, healthy lifestyles.

Housing is expensive, not just the cost of the physical structure but also operating expenses.  Community Development Corporations often work to provide affordable housing to low-income families, but we need to give more consideration to energy costs and energy efficiency.  There is a collaborative effort underway to make utility energy efficiency programs more effective for affordable multi-family housing.  It is called Energy Efficiency for All – Missouri.

Missouri’s Energy Efficiency Investment Act (MEEIA) was enacted in 2009 with the passage of SB376.  The role of MEEIA is to require Missouri’s investor-owned electric utilities to capture all cost-effective energy efficiency opportunities.  Ameren MO launched a suite of customer programs beginning in 2013 as part of a 3-year program in response to MEEIA.  The Missouri Public Service Commission has proceedings underway to review and recommend improvements to Ameren Missouri’s energy efficiency programs.

Low-income households spend nearly 14 percent of their total annual income on energy costs. Other households spend only 3 percent of their annual income, on average, on energy costs.  According to Professor Gary Pivo, in rented multifamily units, energy expenditures run 37% higher per square foot than in owner-occupied multifamily units (i.e. condos), 41% higher than in renter-occupied single family detached units, and 76% higher than in owner-occupied single family detached units. (https://www.fanniemae.com/content/fact_sheet/energy-efficiency-rental-housing.pdf)  Current energy efficiency programs offered by Ameren Missouri are not addressing the needs of affordable multi-family housing.  In 2014, five stakeholder meetings took place to identify the needs of the affordable multi-family sector and how the utility could better meet those needs.

Energy Efficiency for All – Missouri is a collaboration among the National Housing Trust, the Natural Resource Defense Council, Renew Missouri, Tower Grove Neighborhoods CDC, and Kansas City-based Blue Hills Community Services.  Petitions were filed with the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC) so collaborative members can speak at the MEEIA review proceedings.  The Community Outreach Coordinator of the Tower Grove Neighborhoods Community Development Corporation  (TGNCDC) is representing the affordable, multifamily housing sector.  TGNCDC filed a petition with the PSC to participate in the review of MEEIA, which will impact Ameren UE’s energy efficiency programs for 2016 – 2018.

To support this effort, urge Governor Nixon to work with the State Energy Office and other agencies to incorporate strategies into the forthcoming State Energy Plan that will lead to more energy efficient affordable housing. These actions should include:

• Encouraging the Public Service Commission to pro-actively collaborate with the state’s utilities to ensure the successful delivery of energy efficiency services to the affordable multifamily sector;

• Directing the Department of Natural Resources to include all cost-effective energy efficiency in complying with the federal clean power plan; and

• Leveraging limited public resources by encouraging collaboration and coordination among utilities and state agencies, especially the Missouri Housing Development Commission (MHDC).

According to a staff member at the Office of Public Counsel, this is the first time a petitioner has filed with the PSC advocating for the low-income population.  We need to expand our concepts of community development to include energy efficiency measures.  TGNCDC will report to the CBN membership on the PSC – MEEIA proceedings, seek feedback, and support for improved utility energy efficiency programs.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

Community Development is a Good Investment Strategy

By Mary McMurtrey

Mary McMurtrey is currently the Director of Community Engagement for the Greater Saint Louis Community Foundation.  She previously served as President of the Gateway Center for Giving (formerly The Metropolitan Association for Philanthropy) for over six years.  Prior to joining The Center, she served as the Executive Director of Boys Hope Girls Hope St. Louis and before changing sectors to human services she served as the Executive Director of the Wildlife Rescue Center.  Before entering the field of nonprofit management, Mary was the communications officer for the Public Policy Research Center at the University of Missouri-St. Louis where she was recruited to create a new position within the PPRC and to direct the organization’s communications and marketing efforts as an established professional entity in the St. Louis policy arena with a focus on both regional and national issues.  Mary lives in Ladue with her husband Michael and their children, Sophia and Lyla.

Our region fundamentally lacks the community development infrastructure needed to incent local and national development dollars. This is deeply troubling, as it means we are leaving meaningful philanthropic dollars on the table. The community development initiatives we choose to support must make business sense, but they must also help improve the quality of life for the people who live in those communities.

Think about it. Services exist in a place.  A community.  As such, before allocating dollars to a worthy cause, as funders I believe we have an obligation to give equal weight to the quality of life for the people within those communities. We need to think beyond our funding niche, and also focus on community and economic development and give those issues the attention they deserve.

After all, none of us would invest in a for profit business without sustainable infrastructure, human capital, or a growing customer base, yet these are the very (essential) elements we often overlook when we do our grant-making.

All the education reform initiatives in the world can’t make children safer on their walks to school each day. Similarly, administering medicines on an ongoing basis works best when the patient’s basic needs are being met. It stands to reason, we as individuals begin and end each day in our place – our home, our schools, our churches, our workplaces. Our community. Shouldn’t we as funders help improve the societal infrastructure that supports and sustains us all?

I often hear funders describe themselves using statements like, “I’m an education funder,” or, “Our foundation supports the arts.”  While these “categories” define what we fund, I believe they also cause us to operate in silos. It’s no wonder that these silos tend to permeate the nonprofits we support, and ultimately help reinforce the divisions that plague our community.

To combat this problem, what if every philanthropist asked the following before making a grant: “Upon what foundation will my money be supported?  Is there a roof?  Are there sidewalks?  Streetlights?  Will my intervention help build upon a community of people, or will it accomplish a fraction of what it could, simply because we did not look at the problem comprehensively?

That said, our allocation of philanthropy dollars need to make good business sense, but they also must help improve the quality of life for people who live in those communities.  One cannot exist without the other.

I recognize funders can’t solve everything. Often we have limited dollars and must make difficult choices about what we are passionate about and how we give charitably. However, wouldn’t it be novel – and exciting — to tie our education dollars, for example, to other funders who are working to address issues associated with healthy seniors, and at the same time involve other initiatives that are trying to improve the physical conditions of the communities and neighborhoods we are trying to serve?

What if our belated New Year’s resolution was to challenge ourselves as funders and nonprofit leaders to build a little more “place” and “community” into our strategies in 2015?  Imagine how we could come together as a region, as funders, as doers, and really make a difference. I have no doubt the entire country – and those national foundations – would take note.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network of Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis. 

Four Recommendations for Improving Police-Community Relations

By Terrell Carter

Terrell Carter is the Executive Director of the North Newstead Association in St. Louis, MO.  Prior to that, he served as a St. Louis City Police Officer for five years.  He is the author of the forthcoming book Walking the Blue Line: A Police Officer Turned Community Activist Provides Solutions to the Racial Divide.  You can learn more about the book at www.terrellcarter.net.

The Michael Brown shooting and subsequent decision to not indict Officer Wilson has reinvigorated much needed dialogue about how law enforcement interacts with citizens and how to improve police and community relationships.

As a former police officer for the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, I offer the following suggestions that I believe will help both police officers and the communities they serve as we all try to find ways to live and work together for the greater good of all.

Being an officer is one of the most stressful jobs that anyone can have.  Local police departments have the opportunity to help officers locate and take advantage of mental health resources in order for them to better cope with the stresses of the job.  During my tenure on the department, the only time that mental and emotional health was discussed was during the academy.  During my five years of patrolling streets and interacting with people, I wasn’t encouraged to talk to anyone about anything that I experienced while on patrol.  Instead, the attitude was that I should get used to seeing bad things happen on a regular basis.

These departments can work to counteract the negative stigmas that are placed on officers who do eventually feel burned out by all that they experience on the streets.  Officers are taught that they are not a person but an extension of the law.  They have to be tough and strong at all times.  This does not mean that they do not feel pain on the inside.  This fact is born out through the high rates of divorce and suicide experienced by officers.

Second, police departments and academies can add or reinstitute cultural sensitivity training to their requirements for officers on the street and in training.  I patrolled the streets with white officers who didn’t understand anything about black culture because they literally had no black friends or acquaintances other than their fellow officers.  We could not be shocked when these policemen thought that all black people were animals because they only interacted with black people at their worst times.  The same was true for black officers who didn’t have white friends.

Third, law enforcement agencies can begin the practice of rewarding officers for making a positive tangible difference in the lives of citizens.  Currently, if an officer wants to be valued by his or her department, they have to make arrests for a variety of crimes and make sure that those arrested spend time in jail or prison.  Officers have to chase after arrest statistics.  Higher stats result in better treatment by commanding officers and increased possibility of promotion or transfer to a more desirable work assignment.

Consistently, Officer of the Year awards are given for drug busts and the successful execution of search warrants.  It is rare for officers to be acknowledged, let alone rewarded, with promotion or transfers to choice specialized units for taking time to help a family that is poor find resources to help them improve their lives.  They are not rewarded for being “Officer Friendly” who helps people and families work through personal issues and improve communication.  Officers who want to be promoted and move up in rank and influence will gravitate to doing the things that get them noticed, which usually includes high profile arrests.

Fourth, political officials and department commanders should invite regular everyday people from the community to serve in community-based leadership positions within departments instead of political appointees who are being rewarded for supporting politicians during election seasons.  When a person is appointed to a Citizen Review Board or Police Commission by a mayor or governor, citizens know that their best interests will not be served.  The only interests that will be served are those of the person who has been nominated.

If implemented, I believe that these few suggestions can help law enforcement officials not only fulfill their duties to protect and serve but also build bridges of good will with the communities that they are tasked with protecting.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network or Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

The Next Big Game Changer For St. Louis

By Eric Friedman

Eric Friedman is a co-founder of the TOD BroadBand Fiber Collaborative, LLC, and the President of Housing and Community Solutions, Inc., a community, economic development and affordable housing developer, a champion, catalyst and collaborator. He also co-founded the Missouri Historic Tax Credit Coalition and the Transit Alliance and is active in the REALTORS Commercial Information Exchange, Lift for Life Academy Charter School, and Central Reform Congregation.  Eric has lived in University City for the last 23 years.

As a student and practitioner of community and economic development for the past 40 years, I believe the next big game changer is gigabit high-speed broadband fiber at an affordable cost, like Google Fiber in Kansas City.   Having just attended the Gigabit City Summit in Kansas City with an 8-person St. Louis delegation and having  listened to a live-stream of President Obama in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and the eloquent words of Susan Crawford, author of Captive Audience and Responsive Cities and Blair Levin of the Brookings Institution, the issue is very clear.   High-speed fiber can raise all communities in an equitable manner.

High-speed fiber is an economic and community development accelerant. Cities that have installed it, like Cedar Falls, Chattanooga, Kansas City, Lafayette (Louisiana), Austin, and Highland (Ilinois), are experiencing economic growth with  new companies and job creation. For two years we have been researching and assembling the TOD Broadband  Fiber Collaborative to bring high-speed cable to the St. Louis region and in particular, Wellston, and Olive Boulevard in University City.  High-speed fiber accelerates economic development, and it is critical to advancing equity. By providing digital inclusion and social programs that benefit all citizens, it can help to bridge the digital divide.

I have had the honor and pleasure of working with many community development practitioners on great programs that have informed my opinion and helped to rebuild our community.  Let me connect the dots for the rebuilding of our community.  St. Louis is on the move and is ready for high-speed fiber.  Mechanic’s Illustrated just named St. Louis as the number one “Maker Space” in the United States. 

Having worked with Jerry Schlichter as a co-founder of the Missouri Historic Tax Credit Coalition, (Jerry also founded Arch Grants), I have watched the rebirth of our city and neighborhoods, creating a place in St. Louis where young people and knowledge workers want to live, work and play. St. Louis now as two of the “Great Streets in America”.  In Downtown St. Louis alone, 100 buildings have been renovated and we have 5,000 new residents. CEO’s for Cities said St. Louis had the highest percentage increase of college graduates in the Central Business District than any other City in the Country. 

The Wall Street Journal called Missouri’s Historic Tax Credit (HTC) program a “model for the nation.” The HTC created 43,000 jobs in Missouri according to the Missouri Growth Study.  The HTC program laid the foundation for the entrepreneurial explosion and development we are seeing from downtown to Cortex to Dutchtown.  Another dot to connect is the formation of the Transit Alliance, a broad-based coalition that successfully campaigned for passage of the sales tax increase for Metrolink, a foundation for community change.

As Cortex works to build a Metro station, and IKEA comes to Forest Park and Vandeventer, Cambridge Innovation Community (CIC) has also come to St. Louis from MIT. CIC, founded in 1999 in Cambridge, Massachusetts with a vision of “startups make the world much better,” is now the largest innovation center in the world. This the first time they have located operations outside of Boston and they, like IKEA, chose St. Louis.  

I know we can bring high-speed fiber optic service to St. Louis.  Let’s collaborate and make this happen. Besides the great opportunity that Ferguson has given us to address community issues, high-speed fiber can serve our community and all its citizens in a positive way.  High-speed fiber can become a reality that makes our communities safer for all citizens and also for our police who are here to serve the public.   Ferguson is a wake-up call!  Will we rise to the occasion?  Together, we can make these game changers a reality!

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network or Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis..

If You Want to Build Strong Communities, Stop Talking About Diversity

By Natalie Clay

Natalie Clay is a community development, and diversity & inclusion professional in St. Louis. She most recently served as the Education and Training Manager at Diversity Awareness Partnership where she supported organizations of all sizes build more inclusive cultures.  She provided training to over 1,000 people in the areas of unconscious bias, diversity strategic planning and facilitating dialogues about diversity.  Prior to that, she worked with Beyond Housing in a variety of positions, including leading Pagedale Determined, a participatory planning process that was recently recognized by the Missouri Chapter of the American Planning Association for Outstanding Community Outreach.  Natalie has a Masters in Social Work from Washington University, and is a graduate of the CoroTM Fellowship in Public Affairs.

As I reflect on 2014, it’s hard to focus on much more than the unrest in the region.  Many people have enumerated a long list of causes that lead up to the protests and upset-lack of jobs, struggling schools, housing segregation.  The cause I observed was diversity without inclusion.

While the two concepts are often used as synonyms, they are very different.  Diversity describes our differences; inclusion is the process of the differences working together.  What I observed — and continue to observe — are diverse neighborhoods filled with different types of people who do not feel included in the processes of their local governments, community organizations, and neighborhoods.

I care about both diversity and inclusion.  But I care more about inclusion.  We are human beings with DNA that constantly reproduces in random ways.  Diversity happens without me.

As community development professionals, we need to be wary of intentional and unintentional residential segregation along lines of race, class and religion.  However, if we don’t start actively building inclusion, we will never have strong communities, regardless of who lives and works in them.

The reason we don’t have inclusive communities is because inclusion is hard.  We devote our days (and often evenings and weekends) to helping people and communities.  We are good people!  We are also human beings with biases.  And we work with human beings with biases.

It’s normal.  Everyone has biases, even when we disagree with them.  There is a lot of research about the biological reasons we have biases, but I am interested in how we counteract them to intentionally build inclusive communities.

Intentionality is the key.  Human beings are creatures of comfort and routine, and inclusion can be uncomfortable.  It requires us to let go of the paradigms we have, being open to being wrong and trying new things.

Building inclusive communities requires a multi-prong approach:

Personal:  We need more individuals talking honestly about their biases and how they are actively working to overcome them.  I’m happy to have that conversation with you about myself.  Will you join me?  A helpful tool for revealing some of the biases you may not be aware of is the Implicit Association Test out of Harvard University, which can be found at https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html.  They are free, short, and measure the degree to which you associate one idea with a group of people, thus revealing your biases.  I took the test that measures the degree to which you associate people of color with violent weapons.  It revealed that I have a slight bias towards that association.  Now, the only people I know who own guns are white, so I have no lived experience to inform that bias.  And logically I don’t agree with that bias.  But it’s still there.  Now that I know it, I have put steps in place to correct for it.

Organizational:  Build inclusive organizations.  Organizations need to define the reason that inclusion is important to their work; “because it’s the right thing to do” is not good enough.  Once defined, everyone from the Board of Directors to frontline staff need to engage in training and plan intentional steps for strengthening organizational inclusion.  Recognizing the importance of inclusion, Beyond Housing trains all of its employees on diversity.  To plan next steps, they launched an inclusions working group, comprised of staff from all across the organization in 2014.

Consistently re-evaluate how inclusive your community-facing processes are.  In the spring of 2013 I was the lead staff on a participatory planning process that used new and innovative planning processes.  I read every article about participatory planning, and talked to every “expert” around.  And when my plan (full of cool ideas, by the way) was done, I proudly shared it with residents and asked for their feedback.  I wrote some of their ideas down, implemented the ones that fit best with my plan and moved on.  Inclusive, right?  Not exactly.  We got excellent results, but a more inclusive process would have started with ideas from residents about the planning process.

In Communities:  Address inclusion directly with, and between, residents.  It is clear that weekly or monthly community events or meetings are not enough to build true inclusion.  What we need are real dialogues-not debates-about inclusion in our communities.  This fall, the Old North Restoration Group partnered with YWCA to hold a series of conversations around race.  I do not know the outcomes of the dialogues, but I’m glad to see that an organization is taking a chance.

The work of building inclusive communities is not short term.  It’s also not without conflict.  But if we are going to build a St. Louis that is stronger and healthier, we need to seriously take a look at how inclusive we, and our communities, are.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network or Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

The Northside/Southside Metrolink Extension: Crossing the Delmar Divide

By Tom Shrout

Tom Shrout serves on the Washington, DC based Boards of the Center for Transportation Excellence and the National Association of Public Transit Advocates. In 2010 he retired after 22 years as executive director of Citizens for Modern Transit. After retirement from CMT, he formed a consulting company, Avvantt Partners LLC and has worked with community groups and local governments across the county seeking to build support for better transit systems. In the summer of 2014, he formed Missourians for Better Transportation Solutions, a grassroots campaign organization that successfully defeated Amendment 7, a proposed state sales tax increase which would have funded highway expansion in Missouri.

MetroLink is a huge success in the St. Louis region; 17 million times a year people ride it to work, education, the doctor, the airport, ballgames or home. When MetroLink opened in 1993, people from around the country came to St. Louis to learn how we accomplished this feat and what lessons they could learn from St. Louis and apply to their city. With MetroLink such a success, then why aren’t East-West Gateway, Metro, St. Louis City and St. Louis County going full tilt to add additional mileage and stations?

The last line built was the Cross-County alignment to Clayton and Shrewsbury which opened in 2006. Another extension is not in the works despite voters in St. Louis County approving a ½ cent sales tax in 2010 for operations of Metro and MetroLink expansion. The passage triggered a previously passed tax in St. Louis City. Money is accumulating at the rate of about $38 million per year but is not designated for an expansion project.

The cities that visited St. Louis to learn about our early success, such as Denver, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Dallas and Salt Lake City, started their systems well after St. Louis but now have more miles of rail and surpass St. Louis in reaping the economic benefits that occur around stations. They continue to link their regions while we remain stalled.

In the late 1980s East-West Gateway identified a MetroLink alignment that could run from Florissant Valley Community College in North County south to downtown and extend all the way to the South County Mall. This is a big expensive project, but would pay enormous dividends to the region. A higher level of study was completed in 2000 and more study on the city portion of the alignment was completed in 2008.

The planned MetroLink extension would run on West Florissant Avenue through the heart of Ferguson, offering its hard working citizens a high quality transportation option to access education and jobs, not only in downtown, but with a quick transfer to jobs in the Central Corridor of St. Louis. How many of the problems in North County we have learned in recent weeks are related to its citizens being auto-dependent? MetroLink would offer a different, lower cost option for transportation other than the automobile.

Developers who have seen this plan believe it would create development opportunities to revitalize older parts of our region, creating new housing and business opportunities that would serve the existing populations. It would also be a visible demonstration that not all St. Louis economic investment should take place in the central corridor. What’s more the new line could help integrate the St. Louis Region. It would link north to south, crossing the Delmar divide, while also linking the City with the County.

This won’t be easy; even if we start today, it will take 10 years before anyone rides on the Northside/Southside MetroLink train. Think if we had started after the last alignment opened in 2006, we would be riding in about a year. There would be a visible investment in North City and County. It would build on neighborhoods on the Southside that are already gaining strength.

It’s time for area transportation agencies and elected officials to lead on this investment opportunity. Dust off the studies that already have been completed, go to the federal and state governments and make the case to partner with local government for this much needed investment. Let’s build MetroLink, putting people to work now and in a few years taking them to work. The time is now.

Tom Shrout retired in 2010 after serving for 22 years as Executive Director of Citizens for Modern Transit. He and others have formed an all-volunteer organization, Friends of Northside/Southside MetroLink Expansion. The views expressed here are his and not necessarily those of CMT.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network or Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

It’s Time to Develop a Comprehensive Anti-Displacement Strategy for St. Louis

By Jennifer Allen

Jennifer Allen is Trailnet’s Active Transportation Manger where she oversees the Neighborhood Greenways St. Louis project, helps coordinate activities for strategic partnerships, and assists with advocacy campaigns. Jennifer is an urban planner with a Master of Arts in Urban Planning from UCLA. Prior to her work in bicycle and pedestrian planning, Jennifer worked in affordable housing development. A native St. Louisan, Jennifer returned to her hometown in 2009 to be part of the exciting work to transform St. Louis into a world-class city again.

       There are many new projects happening in the city that should strengthen the local economy and enhance the quality of life for residents. The new Arch grounds, the Cortex Innovation District, and improvements to Grand Center are examples of the myriad of projects under development in the city. These projects will provide important connections and economic, environmental, and social benefits.

The question is how do we assure that revitalization projects do not become forces of displacement–neighborhood change characterized by residents being involuntarily forced out when they cannot afford their gentrified neighborhood? Displacement will chip away at one of the greatest assets of our neighborhoods – their racial/ethnic and economic mix of residents.

Anti-displacement policies are often created when displacement has reached a fever pitch after building for years. What if St. Louis developed comprehensive policies and initiatives now as a means of preventing significant displacement rather than waiting for dire consequences? These policies and initiatives could be designed to evolve over time to match the strength of the City’s market.

The research of rebound neighborhoods by Todd Swanstrom of the University of Missouri St. Louis and Hank Webber from Washington University in St. Louis (Rebound Neighborhoods in Older Industrial Cities: The Story of St. Louis) found diversity to be an asset to neighborhood revitalization in the City over the last 30 years. Overall, the City’s rebound neighborhoods have significantly higher levels of racial/ethnic and economic diversity than non-rebounding neighborhoods. But their research also asks if our rebound neighborhoods are simply in the first stage of classic displacement found in strong market cities.

In the interest of preserving the diversity of our neighborhoods, I propose that we take a proactive approach and assume some of our neighborhoods are in the first stages of significant displacement. The Community Builders Network should form a partnership with the City of St. Louis, and others, to make sure we are collecting the right data about how households are impacted by development. A series of indicators should be tracked in a regional context, such as rising rents, property appreciation rates, and rental to single-family home conversions.

The partnership should also begin collecting information on the myriad of tools used across the country to prevent displacement, and begin sifting them along a continuum of their appropriateness for weak market to strong market cities. Finally, the partnership should propose policies and initiatives that should be put in place given our weak market. Financing for local businesses, community land trusts, tightening code enforcement to avoid land speculation, workforce readiness training, and promoting homeownership for current residents are all potential solutions given the current state of our market.

Over time, our community organizations and City agencies have worked on many initiatives that have helped prevent displacement, even if they were not expressly designed to do so. What appears to be missing is a clear, unified voice warning of the potential new levels of displacement possible as we undertake major revitalization projects at a time of significant demographic shifts. What also appears to be missing is a coordinated response at a city/regional scale. The Community Builders Network should use its strong reputation and growing influence to be the visionary leader to take action on this important issue.

The death of Michael Brown has spotlighted many inequities in our region. As we work to heal them, it is our job to make sure our city’s revitalization is a source of prosperity for all–this includes providing residents the choice to stay in their neighborhoods as conditions improve.

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network or Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

The New North: A Proposal for Urban Sustainability

By James Holtzman

James Holtzman graduated from KU in 1980 with degrees in Environmental Design and Architecture. Early in his career he worked with St. Louis firms specializing in adaptive reuse and historic infill. In 1987 he began Miracle Design/Build, Inc., and, as president, he presided over architectural and development services for projects of up to 30 million and more in scope. James has been developing the concept of a sustainable and economically viable city development since 1998, concentrating his efforts in St. Louis on Fairground’s Park. In 2012, he earned a Master’s of Science in Sustainability at SLU using his work with Fairground’s Park as a centerpiece. For the last 5- years he has been involved directly in the renewable energy (RE) industry working with established industry professionals in Missouri and around the country.

According to a United Nations report on world population, 2008 was the first moment in history when more people lived in urban than in rural communities – a development tendency that stands to increase to over 66 percent by 2050. During this time, the total global population will increase from 7 billion to over 9 billion. To learn to live sustainably in an urban context therefore becomes the question of the century.

According to a United Nations report on world population, 2008 was the first moment in history when more people lived in urban than in rural communities – a development tendency that stands to increase to over 66 percent by 2050.  During this time, the total global population will increase from 7 billion to over 9 billion.  To learn to live sustainably in an urban context therefore becomes the question of the century.

Our inner cities, that only a couple of generations ago prospered and were sources of rich and varied activity, have become poster children for abandonment, loss, and stagnation.  Throughout history we have struggled to create a place for ourselves on the land.  Although our successes are in many ways epoch making, without a thorough understanding and respect for the land on which we live and depend for survival, our victories will not provide answers for future generations.

Human interaction with natural systems is one of the defining attributes of culture.  We need to craft human communities that not only acknowledge this axiom but use that knowledge as a springboard for the creation of a regenerative society.  Locally what is called for is a change of heart.  Treasuring our precious resources starting with our citizenry and continuing on through the man-made and natural resource base is the paradigm shift that we need.  There is no “waste” in nature.  The release of creative energy and increase in quality of life resultant from such a paradigm shift would be truly ground breaking and life enriching to community and environment.

Targeting the historic urban area of Fairgrounds Park in north St. Louis as a unifying green space, New North is an effort to define what a sustainable modern community could look like.  This change starts with our students and schools adopting a place-based experiential learning process focused on an urban ecological curriculum.  Our children are assets, not liabilities.  Our cities are places of community growth and empowerment, not something to be neglected and thrown away.  And our generous natural resource base is the gift and treasure on which we depend not only for our well-being but for the well-being of future generations.

Community engagement in New North could help define a new district that crosses ward and neighborhood boundaries using Fairgrounds Park as a unifying urban gathering space.  Once formed, the district will provide the structure for community improvements, starting with green infrastructure and irrigative garden cisterns on a district-wide basis.  Other improvements envisioned include urban farming, gardening, and composting, neighborhood weatherization and rehab, tree planting and horticulture, permaculture, aquaculture and eco-industrial business creation, community energy generation, and health and well care development.

For the benefit of future generations, those less fortunate, and indeed for our own individual survival, this work is necessary.  Natural systems teach us that human communities are dependent upon their environments to thrive and grow.  Locally and nationally we are comprised of sets of interdependent economic, social, and political relationships.  Our charge then is to provide incentives to create a thriving human culture within the bosom of resplendent nature Herself “…That land is a community is the basic concept of ecology, but that land is to be loved and respected is an extension of ethics.”  Aldo Leopold, The Sand County Almanac, (1949).

Articles in “From the Field” represent the opinions of the author only and do not represent the view of the Community Builders Network or Metro St. Louis or the University of Missouri-St. Louis.