 |
Rebuilding cities requires many diverse activities. This section describes needs and recommendations relating to three topics: Energy Efficiency, Lead Based Paint, and Code Enforcement.
Energy efficiency concerns have been mounting in recent years. Increasingly, it is recognized that issues of energy efficiency are closely tied with the economic health and environmental quality of the city. Energy conservation is starting to be framed as the only meaningful and economically sound energy policy.
However, a lag exists between this new consciousness and actual policy changes requiring more energy conscious guidelines. In Missouri, the most notable efforts in dealing with this issue have come primarily from the federal government and the state. St. Louis, like other cities, is primarily conforming with environmental legislation and by administering state funded programs. Aside from a few public ventures, St. Louis has not initiated or supported significant programs addressing energy efficiency.
Current Services
Division of Energy of the Department of Natural Resources: Programs coordinated include low-income weatherization, educational services, institutional assistance, local governments and industry, vehicle efficiency program, and the Energy Efficiency State Buildings Program.
Division of Design and Construction and Board of Public Buildings: These bodies have significant responsibility for state building's energy efficiency.
Division of Family Services: This agency is responsible for administering the federal Low-Income Home Energy Assistance program (LIHEAP).
Environmental Improvement and Energy Resources Authority (EIERA): This agency provided financial and technical assistance to businesses, local governments and not-for-profit organization for energy and environmental projects.
Missouri Housing Development Commission: This agency is responsible for providing financing for affordable, quality housing for low and moderate income Missourians.
Public Service Commission: This body is responsible for regulating the investor-owned energy utilities within Missouri.
Home Energy Rating System: The program evaluates the comparative energy efficiency of a home and give the buyer of a new or existing home relevant information about energy efficiency alternatives.
Energy-Efficient Mortgage Program: The program assists a potential home buyer to either qualify for a larger mortgage to purchase a more efficient home or to make the home he or she wants to purchase more efficient.
Union Electric: This utility company operates four programs which focus primarily on information dissemination and load control. U.E. offers an information program, a low-income and elderly service program, and two interruptible rate programs.
Laclede Gas: This utility company offers a residential insulation financing program. The program allows residential customers to borrow up to $2000 for a single-family house or up to $8,000 for a four-family flat. The loans are available at a 3% interest rate and residential customer may take up to 5 to 7 years to repay the loans.
Urban League of Metropolitan St. Louis, Inc.: This agency is administering the weatherization program in the City of St. Louis for the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. The weatherization program assists Missouri's low-income homeowners and renters, especially elderly and physically disadvantaged people. The services are provided at no charge to the consumers.
Dollar-Help, Inc.: This program is a crisis intervention program established to provide financial assistance to people who cannot pay delinquent heating bills and who have exhausted all other avenues of assistance. Donations can be made in three ways: simple over-payment of exactly $1.00 on the Laclede Gas bill, direct mail contribution to the Dollar-Help fund, and through Laclede Gas Company's Automatic Giving Options Plan.
Needs and Challenges
There are two primary residential and commercial building codes that are relevant. In the residential sector, the Model Energy Code (MEC 92) is used. In the commercial sector, the primary standard is the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers' Standard 90.1-1989 (ASHRAE 90.1-1989). At the present time, these codes have the most stringent requirement in energy efficiency standards compliance. However, the codes apply almost exclusively to new construction. Because the City experiences very little new construction, these codes have minimal impact. Most construction efforts revolve around upgrading of current housing stock through remodeling and gut rehabilitation. Although, the City of St. Louis attempts, wherever possible, to encourage compliance with MEC 92 for rehab and remodeling of residential projects, private contractor and investors are not required to comply to MEC 92 for rehab and remodel projects. The lack of regulation requiring compliance with minimum MEC standards impedes upgrading the City housing stock to more energy efficient standards.
With its predominantly older housing stock, St. Louis is faced with a significant challenge. More than 55% of the city housing stock was built prior to 1940 and the large majority of these units are in need of weatherization. It is estimated that approximately 60,000 units need to be made more energy efficient. The cost per unit for a minimal energy efficiency upgrade that includes weather proofing and storm windows is approximately $3,750. The cost for an energy efficiency upgrade that includes improved home systems is approximately $ $7,750. An energy efficiency upgrade that includes insulation costs approximately $8,750. Table 50 summarizes the total cost and the cost per unit for each level of upgrade.
| COST PER UNIT | TOTAL | |
| Basic weatherization (storm windows, weatherproof) | 3,750 | 225m |
| Systems upgrade (furnaces A/C) | 4,000 | 240m |
| Insulation (roof, ceilings, walls) | 1,000 | 60m |
| TOTAL | 8,750 | 525m |
Upgrading the energy efficiency of existing housing is important if the City is to continue to provide affordable, decent housing to low and moderate income city residents. Poor weatherization and inefficient furnaces causes many low to moderate income people to incur large utility bills which they cannot afford to pay. It is imperative to include energy efficiency and weatherization consideration in the city's efforts to provide affordable housing. One of the largest housing problems in the city of St. Louis is the limited availability of housing for large families. One of the obstacles that make larger homes unsatisfactory for large low income families is the high cost of utilities caused by poorly weatherized homes. Adequately weatherized larger homes can help larger low-income families find suitable and affordable living space and ease the housing crisis faced by these families.
Although the inability of low-income persons and families to meet their energy costs is rooted in their condition of poverty, poorly weatherized homes is a contributing factor to their hardship. The combination of poverty and high energy use, caused by poorly weatherized homes and inefficient systems, is forcing a growing numbers of people to rely on energy assistance. Currently, the Department of Social Services, provides utility assistance to low-income families with federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). In 1994, the department received approximately $37 Million for the whole state to assist low-income families with utility bill payments. In the St. Louis area, in 1993, approximately 23,000 households received assistance, with an average grant of $202 for a total estimated expenditure of $4.7 Million.
Additional public expenditures are devoted to weatherization efforts in the city. The weatherization program administered by the Urban League of Greater St. Louis in 1993 spent approximately $425,000 for the weatherization of 211 units.
These two expenditures alone speak to the financial burden on Federal and State budgets. Current energy and weatherization assistance to low-income individuals and families represents a yearly cost of more than $5 million in assistance, net of administrative costs. A public and private venture between the State, local government, consumers, and utility companies that provide adequate energy efficient and weatherization programs could diminish the demand for assistance, encourage energy conservation, increase employment, and promote government savings.
Recommendations
This would create a mechanism in which all types of housing construction in the city would be required to follow a minimal energy efficiency standard.
This solution would use the standard as an equivalent substitute for MEC 92 for builders, home buyers, and lenders participating in HUD backed mortgage programs and allow buyer to qualify for a larger mortgage in order to buy a more efficient home.
This would require commercial and industrial developers to follow a minimum energy efficiency standard. In addition , the statewide requirement would discourage development in regions without energy standards.
Assistance in this area in the form of technical and financial services would allow many smaller organization and business to develop more energy efficient solutions for their particular needs.
Lack of adequate information is one of the major barriers to adapting more energy efficient practices. People and organization who lack the necessary knowledge will not be able to opt for more energy efficient solutions.
Adequate financing would motivate business and private citizens to invest in more energy efficient solutions.
An effective marketing strategy will help bring the issue of energy efficiency to the forefront. Exposure will encourage people to adopt more efficient solution to their housing and businesses.
Energy expenses for people of low income can often reach 25% of their total expenses. The high expenses are partially due to older homes with inefficient heating equipment and poor insulation. Governments cannot afford to assist these households without limit. Funds need to be leveraged with utility and private funds to maximize the support for energy assistance and weatherization costs.
Resources
Financial support from the Division of Energy of the Department of Natural Resources should be continued for low-income weatherization programs, educational services, institutional assistance including grant and loans programs for schools, local governments and industry, vehicle efficiency programs and the Energy Efficient State Building Programs. The support from DNR will have to continue until alternative solutions to energy conservation are developed.
The estimated total cost of $525 Million to upgrade the energy efficiency of the St. Louis housing stock might be absorbed through a public/private partnership between State Government, citizens, and Utility companies over a twenty year period. This type of partnership could facilitate the shift from a practice of energy consumption to one of energy conservation. Matching funds could be created by utility companies, state and local government and citizens to use for weatherization and general energy efficiency upgrade of dwelling units of consumers as well as for a broader energy conservation agenda. This would lower the amount of energy needed and decrease the reliance on natural resources. Utility companies could than adjust their rate to maintain their profit margin, without increasing the overall cost to consumers.
A leading environmental health hazard is lead poisoning, which is particularly harmful to the developing brain and nervous system of fetuses and young children. Lead poisoning affects 10-15% of all preschoolers in the United States and the most frequent cause of childhood lead poisoning is the ingestion of dust from lead-based paint. This lead-based paint dust becomes available to the child primarily through paint flaking off walls and window sills, wearing off doors and floors or even by rehabilitation if safe procedures are not followed. The severe and irreversible effects of extreme lead poisoning include lowered IQ reading and learning disabilities, decreased attention span and hyperactivity.
Current Services
In 1970, the City of St. Louis recognized the urgency of the problem of lead-poisoning by adopting an ordinance designed to detect, treat and prevent lead poisoning resulting from the internal consumption of lead-bearing substances. The provisions of that ordinance include the prohibition of the use, manufacture and sale of lead-bearing substances; regulation of warning labels, inspections, notice, violations, treatment and prevention programs. This ordinance also makes lead poisoning a reportable disease. In 1971 the ordinance mandated the City to allocate $159,000 to the Health Department for the Lead Poisoning Control Program. All sections of ordinance, as amended, are in force.
In 1978, the Federal government banned the use of lead in residential paint. Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 added the Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act. This Act emphasizes lead-based paint hazard reduction; encourages development of a component "abatement" industry; requires disclosure of lead-based paint in private real estate transactions; and provides grants to State and local governments for lead-based paint. A "hazard" is any condition that causes exposure to lead from lead-contaminated dust, soil or paint that is deteriorated or present in accessible or friction surfaces. Lead-based paint which is not on a chewable, impact or friction surface, if intact, is not considered a hazard.
Lead screenings have been provided by the City Health Department since 1970 and now available at 15 permanent sites and 49 day care centers and preschools throughout the City as well as in a door-to-door van. Lead screenings are also performed by other agencies and private physicians. The City Health Department estimates that it screens approximately 35-40% of all children under age of six every year.
By definition, blood lead levels >10 ug/dl indicate lead poisoning and lead levels >20 ug/dl requires immediate medical evaluation and environmental assessment. If the Environmental Health Inspectors determine that the child's residence contains lead hazards, the owner or landlord is notified, and if voluntary abatement measures, all determined by the lead level of the child.
All housing renovation projects funded in any amount by CDA are inspected by CDA staff. The level and method of lead paint abatement must be included in the project scope of work prior to funding approval. Two CDA staff members have received training in lead paint hazard abatement and disposal procedures at the University of Kansas Medical Center, an EPA-approved trainer. This is to assure that safe, effective and approved techniques are followed for each housing renovation or demolition contract.
Units being developed or renovated for subsequent rental to holders of Section 8 certificates or vouchers are subject to inspection and approval by the St. Louis Housing Authority (SLHA) based on the HUD's Housing Quality Standard. Every unit is inspected annually, when a resident moves in and moves out, and as requested by an owner or an occupant. The inspection guidelines are further described in HUD's Lead Based Paint regulations at 24 CFR Part 35.
Under new legislation, the State has established a Regional Lead Training and Education Program to train and license inspectors, supervisors, and workers, and to educate the community at large in the St. Louis metropolitan area. The program is primarily conducted by the St. Louis University School of Public Health. The community educational program started in February 1994 at day care centers and preschools, focusing on small children and their parents. The training program starts in September 1994.
In the follow-up home visits made to the residences of all children testing > 25 ug/dl, the environmental health officers of the Health Department describe for parents and care-givers the early signs of lead poisoning and the importance of using certain cleaning and maintenance techniques to lessen the risk. The Health Department provides public speakers as well as easy-to-read pamphlets and brochures, and participates in the semi-annual Health and Career Fairs, focusing on the topic of lead poisoning awareness, recognition and prevention. Videotapes are also shown in the lead clinics. District presentations are being prepared by the Lead Prevention Task Force for doctors, families, social service providers, and real estate persons.
SLHA has prioritized a plan that emphasizes the statutory requirements of lead-paint screening and abatement and 504 assessment and compliance. These screening, assessment and abatement measures will be funded under a Comprehensive Grant Program available for physical and management improvements.
SLHA is currently performing lead-based paint risk assessment activities in all of its developments built prior to 1978. Upon its completion, scheduled for December 1994, SLHA will be able to determine what reduction efforts are necessary. In the Comprehensive Modernization of specific developments, provisions are made to abate lead-based paint and other hazardous materials as well as upgrading the development for 504 Handicapped Accessibility. SLHA also discourages new renters from painting habitat to ensure lead-based paint is not used.
A copy of "Notice of Danger" is given by CDA to each owner-occupant or tenant upon completion of renovation or construction. This Notice was originated by HUD to alert and inform all occupants of the dangers of lead poisoning to children.
When an application for an occupancy permit for use as a day care center or a shelter for homeless persons is made, the environmental health officers of the Health Department are notified. Intake staff at the shelters coordinate lead testing of children as they are admitted to the shelter and follow-up inspection is performed annually.The City's lead detection and treatment programs and consequent environmental assessments are run in strict conformance with the guidelines established by the Federal Center for Disease Control.
Needs and Challenges
The presence of lead-based paint, however, does not in all instances present a lead hazard. Other factors to be considered include the age and condition of the housing, poverty and property tenure, and the presence of young children. Using the information supplied by HUD and condensed into the accompanying table entitled "Housing Units by Age of Unit, Tenure and Affordability Group 1990," the City estimates that 138,790 housing units built before 1980 are affordable by 88,752 very low income (less than 50% of the area median) households (renters: 56,361; owners: 32,391) and 50,038 other low income (51-80% of area median) households (renters: 23,817; owners: 26,221). The area median family of four income is $44,600. It has been shown that the older the housing unit, the more likely it is to contain lead-based paint. Using information obtained in a national survey, HUD has reduced this variable to constants that can be used to estimate (+ 10%) the number of homes containing lead-based paint based upon the year of construction. Applying this formula to the data in the table, we estimate that in St. Louis approximately 115,500 housing units contain lead-based paint and of these, 73,700 are occupied by households with very low income and 41,800 by households with other low income, all + 10%.
In 1993 17,850 routine lead screenings were performed on children under age of six, and of those tested, 4,772 (26.7%) showed lead levels >10 ug/dl. and 828 (4.6%) had levels > 20 ug/dl. This represents progress in comparison with the previous year in which 8,610 out of 18,165 (47.7%) children showed lead levels >10 ug/dl and 1,579 (8.7%) children had levels >20 ug/dl. In January through June of 1994, 8,799 children were screened, of whom 2,267 (25.8%) had lead levels of >10 ug/dl and 355 (3.8%) had blood levels > 20 ug/dl. Children with greater lead levels are concentrated in northern and eastern St. Louis City.Recommendations
In light of the serious hazards that exist in St. Louis, the following actions are recommended to be undertaken to improve the currently available services:
Since it is likely that the same children have been screened more than once, the actual number of children who have ever been screened is unknown. In order to deliver the service to the wider range of the population, it is crucial to distinguish those children who have never been screened from those who already have. Screening priority should be given to the former.
This will help people to be aware of the harm of lead poisoning and physicians to be committed to the lead screening services. Education plays a crucial role in improving the lead screening services.
In these substantial renovation projects, the walls and ceilings receive new wall covering.
The primary provisions of this law include: 1) authorization for local governments to inspect homes for lead hazards and the assessment of certain responsibilities to government inspectors and to property owners; 2) requirement of abatement of properties or removal from the active rental market and that owners use safe abatement procedures; 3) development of training and licensing programs for inspectors, lead abatement workers, contractors and supervisors; 4) development of regulations for certified laboratory analysis of lead-bearing substances; and 5) establishment and maintenance of lead poisoning information reporting systems. These new regulations by the State complement the existing Federal and local directives, and will provide the City with the means to assure a more lead-free housing environment. The guidelines and methodologies requisite for implementation of this newly enacted law are expected to be established by December 1, 1994 by a State-wide commission to ensure that the provisions of the previously enacted City ordinance are consistent with this new State legislation and with the Federal law.
This task force, formed in 1993 to develop solutions to the problems of environmental lead contamination and lead poisoning, is a part of Healthy 2000: Model Standards. Members of this organization represent business and industry, finance, law, elected officials, public health, public and private housing and education. A special committee of the task force has developed, through discussion and consensus, specific measurable objectives pertinent to each of the legislated mandates, which were reviewed and adopted by the Lead Poisoning Prevention Task Force on August 16, 1993.
When fully in place, scheduled for December 1994, better and more readily available information regarding the concentration of incidence will be available. The City Health Department is also working with St. Louis County to standardize data collection.
The City of St. Louis has submitted a grant application to HUD to assist in lead hazard reduction. If this application for $6 million is successful, a pilot program involving CDA, the City Health Department and Walbridge Caring Community Center will be initiated to determine a cost-effective lead hazard reduction method. This pilot project will focus on owner-occupied homes in the Walnut Park and Mark Twain neighborhoods. In a City with older housing stock it is imperative that the cost of lead abatement be reasonable and in balance with the value of the property. The experience of some communities shows that if abatement requirements are too restrictive the properties may be left unabated, uninhabitable and abandoned. Thus, finding a cost-effective method of lead hazard reduction is particularly important to St. Louis.
In order to do so, it might be necessary to expand the outreach licensing program. The City Health Department has pointed out that the many needs have not been met because of the lack of resources. To deliver sufficient services to the community will require additional financial support.
Resources.
Although the annual budgets for this program during the 70s and 80s reflected the increase and subsequent cuts common to many programs receiving supplemental federal funds, following the laws of the mid-80s, the total lead programs resources grew to approximately $900,000 in 1987 and to $1,250,000 currently ($1,000,000 from the City, $100,000 from the State and $150,000 from the Federal Center for Disease Control).
A Regional Lead Training and Educational Program is being administered through a categorical grant $800,000 from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) channeled through the Missouri Department of Health (MDOH), along with the Source of Lead Poisoning in Day Care Center from Federal Center for Disease Control. and additional fund from St. Louis University. Human resources have been less available since the State passed the legislation that requires all the workers involved in the lead paint reduction efforts to be licensed.
The housing stock in St. Louis City is currently in a state of crisis. Due to the age of the City's residences, there is a constant challenge to promote stabilization and revitalization. Presently the City's housing stock is less than fifty percent owner occupied. Of the 164,931 occupied units in St. Louis City only 74,352 are lived in by their owners. Thus, the quality and safety of the City's residences lies mainly in the hands of landlords. Those that fall into the category of "absentee landlords" are the most common violators of the City's building codes. Their inability or unwillingness to make repairs threatens both the health and safety of their tenants and their neighbors. Code enforcement is one solution to this problem, and one that was frequently raised during the public-involvement process. Although measures must be taken to assure that buildings in St. Louis remain in code compliance, it is in nobody's best interest for the City to take the title of all such properties. Too often these properties are in such an advanced state of disrepair, that they are too costly to bring up to code. They become a burden upon the surrounding neighborhood, often awaiting demolition and removal by the City. To succeed, code enforcement must be applied prior to such serious deterioration.
Older homes typically experience declining quality, high maintenance costs, and non-code compliance. Currently approximately 55.7 percent of the City's 194,919 housing units were built prior to 1940. According to the 1990 census, the median year of construction of the City's housing units was 1939. Revitalization of the current stock is key in keeping up with current code requirements, as is the allowance of demolition of those buildings for which revitalization is no longer economically feasible.
Current Services
Department of Public Safety-Building Division: The Building Commission is responsible for enforcement of ordinances that regulate and protect public health, safety, and welfare. They issue all construction and demolition permits and perform door-to-door inspections of existing residences per aldermanic request.
Housing Conservation Districts: Housing Conservation Districts are created by ordinance, and are designed to target code related improvements. Mandatory inspections are provided by the Building Commission to residences located in a district. The goal is to inspect rental property at least annually, and owner-occupied housing when it is sold.
Neighborhood Stabilization Task Force: Neighborhood Stabilization officers coordinate all the major services offered to neighborhood residents. Building code enforcement is emphasized especially in former ConServ Districts. NSO officers help neighborhoods with issues relating to absentee landlords. To supplement code enforcement activities, grant and low interest loan programs are targeted to low-income, elderly, or disabled City residents to enable them to bring their buildings up to minimum code standards.
The Urban League of Metropolitan St. Louis: The Urban League offers loan, forgivable loan and neighborhood beautification programs to enable City residents to make repairs on their homes. The organization has a paint distribution program available to low and moderate income homeowners.(Exterior conditions due to lack of paint is a major contributor to code violations.)
Neighborhood Organizations: Throughout the City of St. Louis there are community organizations that offer a variety of services to homeowners. Some operate home repair programs, while others serve primarily as a source of repairs.
Needs and Challenges
The problem of code violations in the City of St. Louis is a result of a combination of many different factors. The age of our current housing stock is a major issue. Also a contributing factor, is the rise in the cost of living as compared to the rate in which income levels in the City have risen. During the years between 1979 and 1989, the median household income dropped 1 percent and the median family income dropped 7 percent. This drop was especially hard to manage when compared to a 21 percent increase in the median value of an owned home and the 37 percent increase in the median cost of rent. As a result, low income families often spend more than the traditionally acceptable rate of 30 percent of their income for housing. In 1990, 7 out of 10 households with incomes of less than $10,000 annually spent 35 percent or more of their earnings for housing. At a rate this high it is understandable that some people do not have the personal financial means to make necessary repairs to their homes. If a landlord is not receiving sufficient income from his property, it is financially difficult to make repairs as well. A situation must be created to enable property owners to repair their buildings and bring them to a state of compliance with existing codes.
St. Louis' dramatic loss of population over the past decades has left much of its housing stock vacant. According to the 1990 census, 15.4 percent of the housing units in St. Louis were vacant (29,988 units out of 194,919).
The significant number of low income residents in the City of St. Louis has put a large amount of stress on the housing stock. All to often, necessary repairs are left undone only to escalate into an irreparable situation. Code enforcement recognizes that building maintenance must be addressed prior to the point where a structure becomes a threat to the safety and welfare of its inhabitants and the community.
Recommendations
The current condition of St. Louis City's housing stock demands immediate attention. Left untreated, deterioration will be irreparable. Those housing units that cannot be rejuvenated pose a threat to their tenants and the surrounding neighborhood. Much of the problem can be dealt with intensive code enforcement. This goal can be accomplished through the implementation of the following:
Often residents are unaware of programs available to them.
Federal income guidelines are often too low to qualify moderate income families for low interest loan programs. Currently home improvement programs target senior citizens, people with disabilities, and low- income families. Middle income residents could profit from the same incentive programs, giving them the ability to make repairs before deterioration is out of control.
Often homeowners experience financial difficulties. When this occurs, insurance policies are often not renewed. Without insurance many homeowners are unable to recover from a crisis such as fire and vandalism. Left unattended the building faces premature deterioration. Buildings that are not in good repair and do not conform with the building code are expensive to insure. This becomes a vicious cycle. Issues relating to affordable and accessible homeowners insurance were identified as an area of importance during the public involvement process.
The City does not currently have the means to keep abreast of the current situation. Derelict buildings pose a threat to everyone in the community.
Currently only the Housing Conservation Districts have mandatory inspection requirements. Often the buildings and areas in great need of attention are not in Conservation Districts. The City does not have the staff at this time to facilitate such a program.
Lack of home maintenance may be reflective of a lack of training and education on home care. The institution of a training program to educate homeowners on how to do preventative maintenance and how to do so cost effectively would be beneficial to City homeowners. Many preventative maintenance tasks and minor repairs can be accomplished by an owner with proper training. This program would be especially effective for first home buyers.
Resources
The City of St. Louis currently is unable to offer across the board inspections of all housing units. To accomplish this would require major additional resources. An estimated 40 percent of residential units in the City have four or more building violations. This reflects the Building Division's estimate of violations to the Existing Structures Code, and the retroactive portions of the Electrical, Plumbing, and Mechanical Codes. Not included is the Fire Prevention Code, the Health Code, the Zoning Code, or the Building Code. This rate translates into 57,000 buildings or 104,000 dwelling units in CDBG eligible areas. The cost of inspection services per 1,000 units are as follows:
| $38,434 | Initial inspection 1,000 Dwelling Units Interior/Exterior |
| 28,862 | Follow-up Inspections |
| 7,750 | Court Costs |
Over a period of five years this service would require $39,000,000 for inspections alone. In addition, the assumed cost of necessary repairs in addition to the costs of inspection could amount to as much as $608,000,000.
Physical, economic and human planning are all critical functions if a community is to spend its resources effectively. Each of the traditional elements of the planning process is important - monitoring conditions in order to recognize problems; gaining consensus about goals and objectives; evaluation alternatives and recommending a course of action for implementation.
Current Servicesthe planning function in St. Louis reflects the needs of an older city, typical tasks include:
Planning is characterized by many competing needs in an older community. In a high demand, suburban location the focus of planning tends to be on the determination of desirable land uses and appropriate land use regulations likely to achieve them. By contrast, older cities need to be much more opportunistic, striving to encourage investment in specific projects. Among the planning challenges in St. Louis are securing adequate resources to take on more than a few projects at a time; finding a common vision or consensus as to what needs to be done, especially on projects where there is a conflict between objectives; improving the ability to examine, display, and project trends in order to better understand what is really going on; and determining how to make housing, human service, economic development and other municipal programs work more effectively.
Given the size and complexity of redeveloping St. Louis, it is clear that effective planning must be a priority. Less clear is the calculation of the "estimated dollars to address" figure. The confusion comes in defining who, amongst the many City officials, constitute "planners." At a minimum it would seem that current Community Development Agency and Neighborhood Stabilization Task Force staffing levels need remain constant.
RecommendationsTo increase the effectiveness of city planning a number of initiatives should be pursued:
Effective neighborhood plans build upon a clear understanding of the broad vision and the specific idea of those who work and live in a neighborhood. In recent years, plans have been prepared for a number of neighborhoods, working in concert with citizen based committees. Over the coming years, additional plans should be prepared for neighborhoods where there is an interest on the part of the residents.
A recurring concern is the difficulty of keeping all those interested in City development informed about current and potential development activity. A conscious, ongoing commitment to communication needs to be made. print, audio/visual, and other media should all supplement routine, direct, face-to-face communications.
The Task Force planner often deals with an immediate problem that could benefit from broad-based information possessed by Community Development Agency planners. In turn, CDA planners can improve their understanding of conditions if they know what the Neighborhood Stabilization Planners are observing in the field. Improved mechanisms for routine communication should be implemented.
The traditional lament about city planners is that too often their plans "gather dust on a shelf." To be relevant a plan needs to be developed with, and be available to, interested constituent groups. This implies making information and plans available to citizens. It also suggests the importance of both routine meetings and informal communication with members of business and neighborhood organizations.
The advent of inexpensive, desktop software has begun to dramatically change the practice of planning. Geographic Information Systems are allowing the rapid retrieval and display of relevant information. Work needs to continue to acquire and customize such software so that planners are able to spend less time collecting information, and more time analyzing its implications and explaining those implications to others.
Along with the acquisition of improved software, a second important objective is the improvement of data systems that can share public information between city departments and other interested organizations. the availability of timely summary statistics that measure conditions and trends, on a small area basis, should lead to more productive and effective planning.
ResourcesToday most municipal planners are supported with General Revenue Funds (Neighborhood Stabilization Task Force) or with Community Development Block Grant Funds (Community Development Agency). Occasional special purpose grants supplement these sources. A strong case can be made for building improved geographic information systems and data base systems using capital improvement funds. This approach has been used by other communities who recognize that investments in information "infrastructure" usually leads to improved productivity gains and customer service.
|
|