Florida is attempting to amend the redevelopment ordinance so the proposed McDonald's is no longer in conflict! That meeting will be Tuesday April 25, 2006 at 3pm, 1015 Locust 12th Floor (LCRA).

So what happens when aldermanic courtesy conflicts with the will of local residents?

What does "urban friendly" development? I have a good idea after taking a look at the crowd protesting.

While the protestors pictured are indeed mostly white, Gravois Park prez Rita Ford is African-American and a very effective community organizer/firebrand!

This isn't about race. It's about development that improves the neighborhood and builds it up, rather than settling for whatever we can get. I don't even know what James Proctor looks like; and in this case it doesn't matter. His establishment is poorly run, and the plan for this site is crummy.

We can do better - for everybody.

I'm not opposed to McDonald's in general; just this particular development plan. I eat at McDonald's all the time - in South City, North County, Midtown, wherever. But that S. Grand location is just awful, so I avoid it.

I am sure Steve Patterson could explain the term in greater depth than I, but my use of "urban-friendly" refers to design considerations. Examples often focus on encouraging pedestrian access and designing buildings that fit in with their surroundings through architectural and size considerations.

As the opponents explained to me, the proposed drive-through would instead bring greater car traffic and sit on a "sea" of asphalt.

If you were referring to the faces in the crowd, though my photos might not show it that clearly, it was a fairly diverse crowd (the photos were taken near the end of the protest. I realized after getting three that I had left my camera. I had to head back to retrieve it).

The attendees I spoke with were residents from the surrounding blocks and those in the Keystone Place development which sits directly behind the proposed McDonald's. Part of the land the Keystone Place development sits on will be used for the proposed McDonald's.

Some protestors even expressed that they really don't hate McDonald's. Others there think that fast food restaurants don't belong in the city. Everyone agrees that the site plan is inappropriate for a street corner on a major thoroughfare in a dense neighborhood. The reason for this opposition is because the McDonald's will have drive-through lanes and an excessive amount of parking spaces. Such a use is unsightly along South Grand, which is an attractive area for people of all classes to eat, shop, hang out and live because it is one of the most walkable mixed-use districts in the city. People who live in the area want to retain the genuine urban quality of the district and would probably support McDonald's if they opened a new restaurant in a first-floor storefront on the sidewalk.

There are, of course, other issues that are important. People who bought homes in the Keystone Place development abutting the site bought homes on the assumption that the redevelopment ordinance for the project forbid drive-through uses on the site. Pyramid also promised to finish their project according to their redevelopment plan, which they failed to do. Instead, Pyramid (and the alderwoman) is backing out of both promises with a strange plan that has no real political support.

The poster who raised the specter of race should be ashamed of her- or himself. Not only was our neighborhood's and City's diversity visible at the protest, but also this proposed McDonald's move is one of the very few issues in the City that does not involve race in any way.

Now that race has again reared its ugly St. Louis head, I posit that this issue is about property values and promises made (by the developer and by our legislators, past and present) that this land would be used for something better than the relocation of a poorly operated McDonald's run by a rich white franchisee, who, instead of reconfiguring his own land at Grand/Chippewa, has enlisted the full support of a white alderwoman to relocate his restaurant to a lot where he spends less to maintain his franchise with McD Corp.

This move would denigrate a development (Keystone Place) and a neighborhood (Gravois Park), the residents of which represent some of the greatest diversity in our City.

Again, I am sickened to find that the few comments on our protest are infected by the ugly specter of racism.

You can't always get what you want!

Florida has attempted to convince people the McDonald's is appropriate by using phrases such as "Urban style" and "Pedestrian friendly." Neither is true.

Architecturally and urbanistically speaking for something to be an urban style would imply that is it built up to the public sidewalk with any parking located behind the building. The newer buildings at Grand & Arsenal with the Breadco & Kinkos would be a good example.

Pedestrian-friendly relates to the urban form. That is, as a pedestrian on a public sidewalk I can walk directly into the establishment without having to cross a parking lot or an auto drive. Again, think about all the buildings along South Grand between Arsenal and Utah, these are examples of pedestrian friendly buildings.

Is that really JF posting above?

Sadly, how the protest flier handled the affordable housing component of this project did come across as classist, calling such housing "cheap." There, the issue should be how our City leaders are willing to use lower income residents as a buffer to a drive-thru, not the materials or pricing.

Granted, just as Southtown Coalition was about stopping the relocation of K-Mart mostly for urban design concerns, there were unfortunately some classist undertones then too, with some fighting to stop Gravois Plaza patrons from becoming Southtown patrons, or outsiders shopping closer to their homes.

Hopefully, just as with Southtown and its urban environment, the majority of those opposed to the McDonald's move, are sincerely concerned about maximizing the urban potential of this great street. Inclusive of diverse patrons, City residents desire a South Grand that is a walkable environment of mixed uses. And a drive-thru fast-food joint detracts from that potential.

Can anyone tell me what happened with this McDonald's and the surrounding neighborhoods?