Pacific Post Office, 324 West St. Louis Street, Screen grab. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
By Pauline Masson –
A proposed ordinance – requested by the Emergency Management Director – that banned parking on three sides of the Pacific Post Office, alarmed downtown residents who said the ban created more safety concerns than it might help.
The former bank building at 324 West St. Louis Street and its parking lot cover the entire block from St. Louis to Union Street and From Second to Third Street.
It was said the ban was intended as a public safety measure to aid truck driver entering and leaving the post office parking area.
Downtown residents and St. Bridge of Kildare parishioners said eliminating the parking places would impact downtown property owners, families attending St. Bridget Church, and students attending St. Bridget Catholic School bd would place an undue hardship on handicapped persons.
North Second Street between St. Bridget Catholic School and St. Bridge Church. Screen grab. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Renee Myers, St. Bridget business manager said the changes for Second Street would have a huge negative impact on parish activities at the church and the school daily.
“We’re not talking once in a while we’re not talking special events we are talking daily. Our children cross the street in a designated crosswalk that is on a huge slope and a hill,”She said. “And they do that daily when they go to Mass as part of St. Bridget of Kildare.”
“We were really surprised that Saint Bridget wasn’t even approached prior to receiving a copy of the proposed bill three weeks ago by Alderwoman Karla Stewart, “ She added.
North First resident Emily Devine said the no parking would Create a special hardship for handicapped individuals.
“The entire campus is on a hill. For those of us blessed to not have limited mobility, it is inconvenient. For those who have mobility issues, parking and entering the church is a struggle,” she said. “Without parking on the street near the church, that struggle changes from difficult to prohibitive.”
“Why would we do this? “Robertsville resident Paul Fisher asked.” My parents went to St. Bridget’s. I went to St. Bridget’s. My kids went to St. Bridget’s. And my families have been here since probably the 19-teens and attended that church. So I feel like I have a little bit of standing here.”
“If you want to look at a safety concern. The safety concern is taking semis up and down through a street where there are two crosswalks and children going across those crosswalks at various times of the day.”
Mr. Fisher said he was glad the post office got a new building, “but they also should be made to abide by the rules too and and for them to keep us safe and keep the children safe,” he said.
“I want to thank whichever alderman brought this information to the school ,” he added.”Otherwise we would have known nothing about it.”
Aldermen voted 6-0 to deny passage of the bill, which is not to say parking ban dead.
After a lengthy discussion of maybe voting the bill down and sending it to committee, aldermen came to no clear agreement on which committee should review the bill – or that it definitely would go to committee. So, the no parking bill, or some version of it, could resurface.
What about between the post office and Camila’s? Can people no longer park along North 3rd alongside their building? Or the Post Office and Brown Jerry’s?
I would think the Post Office knows when they get their trucks in and out, and perhaps there could be a compromise of no street parking at certain hours. I certainly would not want semis going down 2nd Street when schoolkids are about, but what is wrong with the drivers using the commercial streets, like First and St. Louis to get there, except for the last turn? How will Bridget manage funeral lineups?
I wonder if the Emergency Management Director has been to the St. Bridget’s Fish Fry the last few weeks.
I don’t eat there– I always get carryout, and have had to park on 2nd Street a time or two to run in the bottom at the school cafeteria, where they do the carryout pickups. Since it is on a different level than the school parking lot, It would be a pain to have to walk around the building, or through and down and up the steps carrying carryout. No doubt they make big bucks out of those fundraisers.
MAIL’S DISPATCHED, PICKED UP/DROPPED OFF, 24/7, ABOUT EVERY 3 HOURS, LIKE CLOCKWORK.
IT’S CALLED POOR OR NO CITY MANAGEMENT. WHERE’S CITY PLANNING/ZONING? MAYBE DON’T GO YEARS WITHOUT CITY ADMINISTRATOR? DON’T LET THOSE WITH CONFLICTS OF INTEREST MAKE DECISIONS AFFECTING THE CITY?
ALL THESE BUILDINGS/BUSINESSES/LOTS HAVE CODES, CAPACITIES, MAXES, ETC. ALL HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE CARS, EMPLOYEE’S AND CLIENTELE’S.
IT WAS MYERS WHO HAD THE AGENDA AND DID THE HARD SELL TO GET THE POST OFFICE TO MOVE AND TAKE THE OLD BANK BUILDING LOCATION.
MAIL ARRIVES ALL NITE TO BE DELIVERED THE NEXT DAY. BIG RIGS MANEUVER IN THE DARK, IN ALL TYPES OF WEATHER, ON A RIGGED LOT, A RIGGED STREET/CORNER WITH A CONCRETE PATIO IN THE MIDDLE OF A PUBLIC STREET, WITH A BRICK WALL AROUND IT, WITH CONCRETE BUMPERS AROUND IT, AND THEN, TO CTAs, THE CITY SUNK STOP SIGNS, IN CONCRETE AND PUT THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET! THAT SAME BUSINESS TAKES UP 2ND ST. SIDE WITH IT’S SMOKER!
HOW DOES A LEGITIMATE BUSINESS OPERATE WITH ZERO PARKING FOR IT’S CUSTOMERS? CUSTOMERS TAKE UP EVERY OTHER BUSINESS’S PARKING SPOTS ON THE BLOCK BECAUSE ONE BIZ PROVIDES NONE.
PARKING WAS, ALREADY, LIMITED DOWNTOWN.
TODAY, PEOPLE ARE STANDING IN THE STREET TALKING TO THOSE ON THE PATIO AND THERE’S A 2 YR OLD, STANDING IN THE STREET WHILE HER DAD TALKS OVER THE WALL TO SOMEONE ON THE PATIO. TINY LIL GIRL, DAD’S NOT PAYING ATTENTION, PROBABLY HAD A FEW DRINKS, RUNNING HIS MOUTH WHILE HIS KID’S IN THE STREET.
DRUNKS COMING OUT OF JERRY’S AND CAMILLA’S, AND TRACTOR TRAILERS IN AND OUT DOING THEIR JOB, ALL NITE LONG.
EMERGENCY MGMT? WHERE WAS HE AT OTHER P.O.? WHERE WAS HE WHEN PATIO WENT IN PUBLIC STREET? WHERE WAS HE PRIOR TO P.O. MOVE?
I COMPLAINED, ASAP, ABOUT PATIO IN STREET, AND, AGAIN, PRIOR TO P.O. MOVE, ABOUT TRACTOR TRAILERS BEING IN PERIL MANEUVERING AROUND MULTIPLE CORNERS, ROAD BLOCKAGES/PATIO/SIGNS IN STREET. I’M RETIRED FROM THE P.O.
THAT’S HOW PATHEITIC P&Z IS, OR, SOMEBODY GOT PAID. HOW MANY YRS OF THAT MESS AND NOTHING’S BEEN DONE? NOT ONE PERSON KNOWS RIGHT FROM WRONG IN THE CITY? YOU CAN’T PERMANENTLY BLOCK A LANE OF A PUBLIC STREET!
AND EMPTYING BLOCKS IS THIS GENIUS’S FIRST RECOURSE? HOW ABOUT GET THE PERSONAL CRAP OUT OF THE PUBLIC STREET? THE PATIO, WALL, FENCE, BUMPERS, STOP SIGNS, ETC., NOTHING BELONGS IN THE STREET BUT VEHICLES!!
TRY REGULATING THE OFFENDERS.
HAVE A CITY PLAN AND MAINTAIN IT RATHER THAN MAKING DECISIONS BECAUSE SOMEBODY PROFITS.
IN 10 YRS, THE CITY WENT FROM DOWNTOWN, TO OSAGE, TO BACK DOWNTOWN, ZERO PLAN.
AND THESE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE TRYING TO FORCE DATA CENTERS DOWN OUR THROATS.
I’d like to take a moment to share some facts regarding the proposed Bill. These are presented with the hope that they will be disseminated and understood as vigorously as many of the misunderstandings that have been going around. Let me begin by saying that indeed, the Bill is motivated by public safety, law enforcement regulations, requests from handicapped citizens, and live experience from both normal traffic days and from special events periods. Facts include:
• Many proposed details are to codify specific spots which are currently “unofficial” in nature, but already used for the exact same purpose, e.g. the seemingly appearing handicap parking spot on 3rd St. next to Camila’s.
• Other proposed details are to properly legalize the spot to comply with prescribed regulations, e.g. the handicap spot in front of the ex-USPS building, and the one on St. Louis Street in front of Camila’s.
• Additional handicap spots are proposed at the request of local disabled residents and will bring us closer to having improved ratios in our core downtown area., e.g. 2nd St/St. Louis
• Painting and signage are part of the Bill to clearly make visible No Parking zones which are already illegal to park in, e.g. on the west side of 2nd St in front of the USPS driveway and alleyway.
• No Parking signage is recommended at intersections to avoid illegal parking blocking sidewalk ramps and crosswalks, as well as to add driver and pedestrian visibility safety for accident mitigation, e.g. Osage/4th St and St. Louis/4th St.
• Only 1 currently used spot on 3rd St is being proposed as No Parking to prevent alleyway and driveway blockage. Otherwise, there are no fewer parking spaces being recommended on any side of the USPS facility. This includes 2nd Street and St. Louis St.
• Some of these permanent changes will also save taxpayer dollars as neither Public Works nor the PD will need to spend materials or time when Special Events are planned, e.g. fewer temporary No parking signs.
When a revised Bill proposal becomes available, I encourage all concerned parties to take the time to assess the facts, inquiry as to the rationale and benefits, and consider all the pros/cons of the changes. Emergency Management is not political, nor emotional, but rather serves objectively to prevent/mitigate risk in advance of possible incidents. Public safety is an imperative we can all contribute to.
Hal, I take issue with what you say here and with the proposed bill.
First, I do not think the emergency management director should be making laws. I understand that you took bullet points from the emergency management committee meeting to the city attorney and asked him to write a bill (a proposed ordinance) that was put before the board of aldermen (BOA) to vote up or down – with no time to consider the effect this law, if passed, would have on citizens.
No matter how you weigh it, this is trying to write a law.
I don’t think there is anything in city codes that empowers, or even suggests, that the emergency management director or the emergency management committee can write laws.
Laws can only be enacted by a majority of the BOA. A more logical approach to this would have been for you to take the bullet points to the BOA at a public meeting to allow them time to digest it, and let them decide if they want to ask the city attorney to draft an ordinance – and maybe check with their constituents.
What you say here is even more damning. You say, “the Bill is motivated by public safety, law enforcement regulations, requests from handicapped citizens, and live experience from both normal traffic days and from special events periods.”
What pubic safety? Who is in danger here? What law enforcement regulations? What live experience?
You say, “Additional handicap spots are proposed at the request of local disabled residents and will bring us closer to having improved ratios in our core downtown area., e.g. 2nd St/St. Louis.”
Improved ratios? This idea pits handicapped citizens against the residents who live downtown and have a need to park somewhere near their homes. An open discussion about this was called for before you took your bullet points to the city attorney.
You say, “Some of these permanent changes will also save taxpayer dollars as neither Public Works nor the PD will need to spend materials or time when Special Events are planned.”
Really Hal? Traffic enforcement is one of the main responsibilities of the police department. You want to relieve them of enforcing parking during special events. The police are at every special event, in numbers.
You say, “When a revised Bill proposal becomes available, I encourage all concerned parties to take the time to assess the facts, inquire as to the rationale and benefits, and consider all the pros/cons of the changes.”
Aldermen were expected to vote on this when it was presented to them. There was no time alloted for them to assess the facts.
And finally, you say, “Emergency Management is not political, nor emotional . . .”
Everything that goes before the BOA is political, Hal. They are politicians That’s what they do. And — surely — you saw that this was a pretty emotional issue with the downtown residents who were belatedly notified that the bill was on the meeting agenda..
So my conclusion is, if in the future your duties as emergency management director lead you to wish for other new laws, please consider starting with a pubic discussion at a BOA meeting before you ask the city attorney to write an ordinance.
We, the taxpayers, have to pay this city attorney for everything he does. How much did this cost us for him to write this proposed ordinance?
You are exactly right. There seems to be a lot of confusion here between Emergency Management and Public Safety. Although they are related and work hand in hand, there should be a definite/distinctive separation. And as I’ve said in the past, it doesn’t matter how many signs you put up if you don’t have enforcement.