此内容暂无简体中文译文，以下为英文原文。
A public hearing on board Bill 307, which would approve the redevelopment plan for the triangle area was held at the Board of Alderman hearing room on February 15th.
Aldermanic hearings on the redevelopment plans for Washington-Euclid, Pershing Avenue, and Forest Village along DeBaliviere were held on succeeding Tuesday nights.
## Pro
Calvin Stuart, SDCC director then presented letters favoring the redevelopment plan from St. Roch’s Church, Grace Methodist Church, Delmar Baptist Church, the local business men’s association, Washington University, Rosedale-Skinker and Washington Heights Neighborhood Associations.
Mr. Jerome Pratter of Team 4 urban planning firm, outlined the three phases of the plan for the aldermanic committee. He pointed out that the present tax rate for the area will be paid by the developers for 15 years, and that an additional 50% on improvements will be paid for the second fifteen years. He also indicated that 42 buildings in the development area have already been condemned by the City and are in the process of demolition and that another 32 appear to be falling into the same category.
He stressed that owner occupied buildings in good condition were not included in the redevelopment plan and that rehabilitation of existing buildings would be done where possible. As a practical matter, however, he did not feel that any developer could afford to give up the right of eminent domain in a program that would take a number of years to complete.
The redevelopment plan was further endorsed by Horace Busch, area resident; Ed Walsh, representing the Parkview Agents and the 28th Ward Republican organization; Kenneth Cohen, RosedaleSkinker chairman; Charles Valier, state legislator; James Stemmler of the Central West End Association; Norman Murdoch of the City Plan Commission. Mrs. Joyce Warren of Washington Heights Neighbors endorsed the plan but expressed doubts about the park space and school population estimates.
Mr. James Cannon of the architectural firm of Hellmuth, Obata and Kassenhaum, which plans to develop Maryland Gardens at Maryland and Taylor Avenues urged approval of the Kingsbury plan, stressing its importance to the area east. He urged prompt passage calling delay, “the great enemy of redevelopment as inflation eats up available funds.”
Fred Hale of the 25th Ward Republican organization and Mrs. Parker Burns of Women for City Living also urged passage of the redevelopment bill.
## Questions
Mike Magrath, area resident, questioned the proposal on educational facilities and the relocation capacities of SDCC. He supported a community center and other recreational facilities in the area and argued that the present plan did not allow for enough very low income residents.
Henry Rowell, owner-resident in the area, questioned the City Plan Commission ruling that if in the redevelopment process owners decline to bring their property up to minimum standards the redevelopment corporation must take over and meet the minimum standards.
Ed Ward, area resident, expressed concern that development on Garavelli’s parking lot would effect DeGiverville residents, but was informed that this property is not part of the redevelopment bill.
## Con
OPPOSITION TO ALDERMANIC APPROVAL was expressed by John Anderson, West End resident because of relocation and school problems, the additional density of mid-rise buildings and the lack of transportation. Tom Bauer, former resident, opposed the plan for bringing additional children into a crowded school district, a loss of tax funds, a concentration of low income families, the possible misuse of eminent domain and the staff limitations of the SDCC.
Anna Mae Houck of the national Welfare Rights Organization spoke, urging that welfare families be given first choice of new units. Mrs. William Kieffer, charter member of Washington Heights Neighbors, critized the plan on the grounds that the population density of the area is already too high and that the overall Skinker-DeBaliviere area has an overabundance of subsidized housing at the present. She favored more single family dwelling in the area.
Lorena Jeanne Tinker of the George Warren Brown School of Social Work, opposed the redevelopment on the grounds that poor residents were not included in the planning and that manipulations by real estate straw parties had caused the local problems. Mrs. Robert Weinberg of Women for City Living questioned the inclusion of only low and moderate income housing, and the use of public funds in such construction.
State Representative Fred Williams of the 72nd District read a statement opposing redevelopment on the grounds that he understood SDCC Board members had real estate licenses; that the SDCC director had been a director of the Metropolitan Housing Corporation in East St. Louis; that the Kingsbury Redevelopment Corporation had no management experience; that redevelopment would decrease the value of the surrounding area; that school and recreational facilities were limited; that redevelopment was planned to thin out the black population of the 28th ward; that more multiple dwellings would add to the density of the population; that he feared the use of eminent domain; that relocation facilities were not good ; that the Mill Creek experience might be repeated.
Originally published in The Paper, March 1972.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Original source: SD_Times1972_03.pdf, printed page 7.
