Touchmark to gift trees to All Saints Neighborhood

by

Funny, after all of the crying about ‘destroying a neighborhood’ by cutting down a couple of trees, it seems the neighborhood may have a change of heart;

When Touchmark removed dozens of mature trees, angered neighbors said they felt misled about the number of trees that would be spared.

Last week, Touchmark agreed to donate $3,750 to help the All Saints Neighborhood Association plant up to 100 trees in the neighborhood.

“Neighbors aren’t always going to agree on issues. What’s important is that something positive has come about because of the issue itself,” said Katrina Lehr-McKinney, the association’s president. “Touchmark, in our neighborhood, has found another way to work together to make something positive happen.”

I have said from the beginning a couple of things,

  • Touchmark owns the property, they should be able to build what they want to within limitations.
  • The grove of trees next to the retirement center was actually pretty creepy (I nicknamed it Gorky Park), and anything there would be an improvement (in fact I have been enjoying the construction project because you can see the old building now that the trees are removed).
  • I have felt this was never about the trees but the industrial hospital complexes fighting Touchmark providing therapy and care to their clients on campus, and some neighbors in the hood were manipulated to fight it under the guise of ‘trees’ and ‘historical preservation’.
  • Now we find out, they will add even more trees to the hood (though I am opposed to planting in the boulevard.)

See, a happy ending after all. I wonder if the new therapy center will be providing Chinese massages? But don’t complain about that to the city council, or they will call you a racist.

Who will replace Darrin Smith? Or will there be a replacement?

by

While studying the city management salary increases over the past five years, we came across some interesting title changes. People were hop-scotching back and forth between the public works department and engineering. Not sure if this had to do with pay adjustments or what. It kind of looked like an accounting game.

Either way, there seems to be a discussion going on similar in the community development office. Will Darrin Smith have to be replaced or will restructuring of the department eliminate a Czar of community development?

With the new council rolling in, and the change of rules when appointing department heads (council must also approve the mayoral appointment of the director, no matter the size of the department). Could be interesting to see what kind of extra duties some of the other directors may have to take on to avoid a mayoral appointment.

Of course this wouldn’t be the first time the mayor would be playing hard and fast with the rules.

Huether is at it again, Saber rattling for another unneeded project

by

You would think with all the silliness going on with the administration building the last thing Huether and his minions would want to do is push for a project by claiming it is a done deal before it is;

Project backers of a $40 million hotel, retail and residential facility as well as a public parking ramp known as The Banks are no longer pursing the downtown venture, citing higher than expected construction costs. As a result, the city intends to move ahead with the parking portion of the plan – a 600 space parking garage – as a standalone project at 110 E 10th Street where a surface parking lot sits.

Except, once again they are leaving out the finer details of ‘moving ahead’ like the administration building;

The contract with the construction manager – still being negotiated – and project financing will require council approval before any work begins on the parking ramp.

That’s right, the city council still has to approve bonding from the parking’s enterprise funds before any work can start. Remember those parking rate increases passed recently? They were pushed through to pay for bond payments on a new parking ramp. Now a parking ramp we don’t need. Once again, the administration got the cart before the horse, and we are all paying for it.

We don’t need another parking ramp. We should have thought of all this before selling a fully functional one for $1.

BOOM! Plop. pfoof

by

Darrin Smith’s batting average lately hasn’t been to good;

The city said Thursday that private investors have backed out of a planned $40 million downtown project that would have included loft apartments, retail and a boutique hotel.

“The hotel and apartment folks have informed us recently that it’s not financially feasible for them to continue,” Sioux Falls Community Development Director Darrin Smith said.

So why in the Hell would we move forward on a $10 million dollar parking ramp without a leasing tenant? Wait until we get an interested party, then build the ramp. Or better yet, don’t build a ramp at all and let private development take care of private development, and tax dollars take care of citizen projects, like maintaining the roads.

Mike and Darrin have this great desire to spend tax money on unneeded projects. The new council is probably going to be working with smoking brakes until the end of Mike’s term.

UPDATE: Is the City of Sioux Falls set to ask for another taxpayer handout for more buildings we don’t need?

by

UPDATE: Imagine my shock and awe when I found out today that the city is proposing exactly what I suggested, a long term lease with a private hotel, instead of a financial partnership. But before I whistle and clap, I have a feeling this RFP changed once the city realized their borrowing power may be decreasing. Either way, we get another hotel and boring hotel restaurant on the dismal side of town.

Darrin Tiffilicious is set to ask for more taxpayer money tomorrow for another private entity, I’m guessing;

A hotel and restaurant are soon to be built on the southeast side of Elmwood Golf Course. Come to this news conference to learn the franchise of the hotel, the brand of the restaurant, and to see renderings of a development ready to break ground this year.

A few years ago when this plan was first hatched, it was mentioned that taxpayers would be fronting the money for a hotel on city land by Elmwood golf course. I’m guessing this has not changed. While I agree we probably could use another hotel in that area, I question the past proposed plan where we would be asking taxpayers to build the hotel then share revenue with a private management partner. I think a more prudent plan would be for a private partner to build their own hotel, and lease the property from the city, keeping taxpayers off the hook for profit and loss and paying for the structure.

I guess we will have to wait and see the details tomorrow, but like the half built aquatic center and the proposed administration building, I’m guessing taxpayers will be asked to bond for this project also. I think this kind of partnership goes to far and I hope the new council rejects any plans to fleece taxpayers for a private project like this. Indoor public pools are one thing, but publicly subsidized hotels goes to far, especially when this city lags in affordable housing.

Like I said though, the devil is in the details.