Fresh Thoughts On Old Blogs

Top photo was taken April 21, 2009. Bottom photo was taken May 6, 2009.

Technology Village Needs More Than Very Nice Sign

There are times when I write a blog that has an ulterior motive.

Surprise, surprise, surprise as Gomer Pyle liked to say on The Andy Griffith Show.

The blog I published on Monday involving the University's naming choice of its proposed development on I-55 was one of these. The initial reason I wrote that blog was to point out that the University already had an existing and apparently undeveloped "Technology Park" located on South Kingshighway.

However, any mention of that project did not make it to the final edit of my Monday blog. I will explain the reason why in a moment.

First of all, if you were unaware of the existence of the Technology Park, you are not alone.

It was a modest 13-acre site across the road from A-1 Mini Storage and south of Holloway Carpet.

The property was donated to the University's College of Business in the late 1980's.

According to the archives at the newspaper, it was officially christened on a windy and cold January 30, 1991 with the promise that the land would be divided into 4 lots targeted at "light manufacturing, heath-related businesses, testing laboratories, and computer-related businesses."

A University official at that time said that the development would offer business students access to applied business technology and provide them "hands-on learning experience."

A very nice sign on the property was unveiled on that day.

But apparently not much has happened to the development since then. There were no reports in the newspaper archives indicating that any of the 4 lots were ever actually developed by anyone.

SEMO generates press releases for pretty much anything that involves the University. They're probably issuing a press release at this very moment, notifying the media that I've written about them in a blog.

OK, so I might be exaggerating a smidge, but the newspaper has always championed and promoted new business development for as long as I can recall and if the University had actually developed any of the 13-acre site, I'm sure it would have made the paper and our archives. But the only other reference to the park was an editorial a few days after the unveiling that applauded the effort. That was it for the next 18 years.

Since I could find no other mention of the development in our files other than the editorial and the coverage of the ceremonial unveiling of the very nice sign, I contacted the University's News Bureau. That was on Monday, April 27.

Unfortunately, their response gutted my original blog premise.

I was told that the University Foundation no longer owned any of the land. According to the University, the first section of the Technology Park was sold off in 1993 and the last piece was divested this past December.

I suggested to the News Bureau that the University might want to consider removing their very nice sign. It looked bad having it in front of a big open field that the University no longer owned.

They either took my advice or SEMO's Facilities Management coincidentally had the removal already planned, since a reader tipped me off that the University removed it last week.

My original intent of this particular blog -- prior to being gutted -- was to suggest that the University should consider finishing the development of this Technology Park before they dived headfirst into the massive and potential very expensive Technology Village concept being championed out by I-55.

I think what Bill Murray's character practices in the movie "What about Bob" would have been appropriate in this case.

Baby Steps.

Finish a 13-acre development before attempting to tackle one almost 30 times bigger.

I was going to suggest that since the land on South Kingshighway was donated to the College of Business that maybe the University could involve their MBA students in actually attracting businesses to this long fallow property. Talk about practical experience. What a great challenge it would have been.

Rather than quietly divesting itself of the development, the University could have had some of their business students actually attempt to re-imagine the property into something usable.

But instead, over the last 18 years, the land just essentially changed hands with none of the promises made on that cold day in 1991 ever apparently coming to fruition.

Granted, the Technology Village is a much better location, and in real estate development the rule "location, location, location" is quite accurate. Whenever the economy starts perking back up, it will be a far easier site to develop than the property on South Kingshighway ever was or ever will be.

I pray that the University truly uses this significant asset to benefit the education of its students rather than just parceling it off to whomever will pay the most. The 400 acres is prime real estate ripe with both economic and educational opportunity for the entire area. I hope this administration doesn't squander the opportunity while spouting empty rhetoric.

We need more than just a very nice sign.

Dirnberger House on William Being Auctioned Off

In February, I wrote a blog about a noteworthy house in my neighborhood that I've watched slowly decline over the last 15 years. The house was foreclosed on in the fall and listed for an incredibly cheap $29,500 -- almost $100,000 below what it had previously sold for.

It was snatched up for even less, and now is being auctioned off on May 16. It will be interesting to see how much it sells for. It definitely needs work, but it could be a jewel.

Manufactured Home Excavation Creates Gas Leak

In March, I wrote a blog criticizing the zoning commission for turning down a special request for a manufactured home on Fountain Street. The City Council wound up over-ruling the commission and the owner of the property -- Alfred Farrar -- got his permit.

He made news again this week when excavations at his property severed a gas line resulting in a two-block evacuation. At the time of this writing it was not clear if Mr. Farrar actually contacted Missouri One Call -- the state system that marks utility lines -- prior to excavating.

He says he did. Missouri One Call and AmerenUE said they have no record. If he didn't, he should of. Excavating without calling is both stupid and illegal.

I don't know who is at fault in this case, but I do know that I live in a neighborhood that is comparable in age to Mr. Farrar's. Last summer, Ameren replaced our home's gas line. According to their records, it was quite old and needed replacing.

So they had the utilities marked in front of our house, cut out a nice big section of the street and proceeded to dig. They found a gas main, but not the live one. Rather it was that had already been decommissioned for sometime. They eventually found the live gas line that was actually supplying our house about 4 feet away in the grassy median.

My point is that even when you do use the proper procedures, old records are not always accurate.