This is a long video, but worth the listen. Jim offers solutions to big problems by using baby steps and community to achieve them.
UPDATE: I guess the neighbors are going to Not oppose the alcohol license now. Which is good, because I need a beer to wash down my boutique benny’s.
The proposed Bunker Coffee Shop at 9th and Grange has gone thru so many business proposals since it’s inception they really should honor the process by calling the place, ‘The Chameleon’;
Halbach also requested a conditional use permit for beer and wine — though it’s for brunch-related beverages as hours will be 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. daily.
An outdoor beer and coffee bar is planned in the back on a vacant lot he also owns, designed for overflow seating because there’s indoor space for only about 20 guests.
So he wants to change it from a neighborhood coffee shop to a boutique brunch place? Okay. Or maybe a beer garden;
“So this will essentially allow us to send people to the outdoor beer and coffee bar to get a drink while they wait for a table and play yard games or hang out in the yard,” he said, estimating that area could hold up to 50 guests.
I have no issue with allowing them to have beer and wine, BUT, I also don’t live in the neighborhood. I can tell you my experience from having a pretty popular bar only a block from my house a few years ago, it can come with some extra noise but was a welcome addition, I was sad when it closed only to be replaced by another telephone booth casino.
I can tell you that people who live in Pettigrew and Cathedral neighborhoods are opposed to the alcohol request, mainly because Bunker House Coffee keeps changing what it originally proposed, from exterior/interior designs to taxpayer supported on-street parking and facade easements;
The project received a $95,000 facade easement grant from the city of Sioux Falls, and work to redo the brick is scheduled to start soon.
Interesting the facade now jumped $20K from what was originally asked for.
“The guts of the building are in really bad shape,” Halbach said.
The GUTS?! Just looking at the building you could tell it is a complete wreck. I am all for historic preservation and commend people who want to fix up older structures, but personally I would have bulldozed it and built a one-story building with roof patio that would have comparable historic architecture. Probably would have saved him a million bucks.
Hey, I get it, we all have our passions in life, but you can’t bring along the public in a concept that changes it’s colors every 5 minutes.
I think there will be some public blowback to the alcohol permit, but like the facade easement (to the former campaign treasurer of Councilor Curt Soehl), this will pass with flying colors.
Who wants a Mimosa?
The City of Sioux Falls will be launching a new mobile market offering healthy foods at an affordable cost.
This would include multiple buses with markets stationed throughout neighborhoods in Sioux Falls.
The city will be giving two hundred and fifty thousand dollars to Sioux Falls Thrive to pilot the “Eat Well Sioux Falls mobile market.”
One of the best things about this idea is that the group pushing this, Thrive, lead by former city councilor Michelle Erpenbach, is that they are not re-inventing the wheel, they are instituting the proposal built on proven programs used in other cities and countries.
If you watch the entire presser, you will also realize that the program is expected to be self-sustaining after 18 months. In other words this isn’t just another problem the city throws money at and forgets about a year later, there is a long term goal to make this work.
One of the other intriguing parts is that they will try to help people sign up for SNAP benefits if they need that assistance. I would go even a step farther and have job listings and access to employment and higher education opportunities.
Let’s face it, between inflation, the roller coaster economy, high cost of housing and low wage jobs in Sioux Falls we have put ourselves in this place.
I was astonished to hear in the latest financial report from the city that in 2022 over 50% of sales tax revenue came from restaurants. The hospitality industry is known for some of the lowest wages of any sector.
I’m not sure why the service industry is propping up our sales tax collection but it is proof our economy in Sioux Falls is being supported by a low wage industry. Maybe Thrive needs to look at this disconnect?
I think everyone should have access to affordable food but they also should have access to liveable wages.
The administration has been busy pushing it’s agenda onto the city council just waiting for their rubberstamp approval;
The new zoning districts, referred to as “midtown mixed use,” are specifically aimed at increasing population density and walkability in fitting parts of the city. An ordinance that would introduce them into the city’s zoning options passed to a second reading unanimously Tuesday.
They range from three-to four-story buildings that could fit near single-family homes to seven- to 10-story buildings that could only be built along some of the city’s busiest streets, or perhaps a whole city block.
Councilor Rich Merkouris said increases in this type of zoning could hopefully be accompanied with improvements to the city’s transit system, and Councilor Greg Neitzert said bicycles should be taken into account while sidewalks and roads around the buildings are developed.
With most proposed city ordinances, the devil is in the details.
I support building density and finally cleaning up corridors like Minnesota Avenue, but I’m starting to get the feeling this will be more like the old Westerns with the fake main street facades. We can clean up the curb appeal of Minnesota Avenue all we want but it is what is behind the street that concerns me more.
When cleaning up neighborhoods it starts with the lowest rung on the latter, that means a total overhaul of our core neighborhoods FIRST then we can concentrate on the window dressing.
And Rich and Greg are correct, there are many other issues we must solve first in our core before dreaming about moving next door to George Jefferson in the high rise with an awesome view of the Pita Pit roof.
Of course Wealthy Welfare Developer Queens have their prince on the council;
And Councilor Alex Jensen said there would need to be incentives to make the zoning appealing, saying it was easy to go buy land on the outskirts of the city for a one-story project, if the location made sense. Convincing that hypothetical landowner to get into the core of the city could take some extra work.
Which means tax rebates and TIFs. Ironically there is a natural incentive to those who actually play the FREE market system fairly, instead of waiting for government handouts, you get to build 5 to 10x the square footage on the same plot of land in the core as opposed to a cornfield next to Brandon.
Besides transit and walkability I also have other concerns about transitioning these buildings from well established core neighborhoods. So does councilor Soehl;
“If Mr. and Mrs. Smith have been living in their house for 40 years and now we’re gonna put a seven-story building in the same city block, explain to me how you’re gonna alleviate the city council from making that hard decision,” Soehl said. “Because it’s gonna end up with us. The complaints, the packed room, it’s gonna end up here to make those hard decisions.”
Once again councilor Soehl is choosing to take the safe and easy road and wanting to throw out the entire proposal based on the fact he may have to make a decision. This kind of zoning WILL require a case by case basis review and approval. DUH! What works well at 18th and Minnesota may not work at 33rd and Minnesota, I think the public and developers get that.
Building density is always a good idea, this is NOT complicated.
About two weeks ago I decided I needed to know more about why the Sioux Falls School Board is considering the cut. I talked briefly to three different school officials. All three of them were clear, It’s going to be cut. While money and participation rates were mentioned, one thing was pretty clear, this cut was inevitable months ago when the school board was having budget talks;
“The lack of transparency regarding the process to cut gymnastics has been unsettling. The level of misinformation regarding the narrative of the gymnastics program’s history is alarming. And to force young women to come before the board to beg to participate in a sport that they love is appalling,” parent Angie Allen said.
I’m obviously on the fence since a majority of my property taxes goes to educating other people’s kids, which I’m fine with, but I do get my feathers ruffled a bit when the only time parents show up to tangle with the district is to save some program for a handful of kids (remember the AP fight with moving the school start date?).
I said to one of the school officials, “Isn’t public school really about educating?”
I also talked to some friends with young kids. One couple told me it has to do with the club sports. I’m all for club sports, just like it costs me money to maintain my bicycles, the payoff is enjoyable recreation and transportation. Sometimes if you want to do something that is NOT offered on the government dole you have to pay for it out of your own pocket. But these parents told me that some of the club sports will not allow membership if you are competing in public sports of the same genre. Then there are the kids on free or reduced lunches who definately are NOT participating in club sports. Not sure if this is true, but it seems odd to me that the school district isn’t sitting down with ALL club sport leadership and the SF Parks department to come up with more equitable options.
Of course that brings us back to transparency again.
I think the school board and administration COULD have found the funding this year, which could have given them a YEAR to figure out a permanent solution thru public meetings and forums. In a year, the conclusion may be the same, but at least you vetted the program with parents in a open forum and tried everything possible to save it.
What if the SFSD proposed cutting girls basketball or boys football? Parents would have torn the Instructional Planning Center to the ground.
Are we saying those sports are more important because there is more participation? Maybe there is more participation because there is more funding?
I agree with gymnastic parents, this is really about fairness. And even if I don’t have children, I do sympathize with these parents, because once again government secrecy provided an authoritarian plan that it seems no one is happy about, even the school board members.
Parents need to ask for open government first, then we can proceed with the negotiations, because what happened Monday night was NOT a negotiation. Parents were handed a decree from school board members who prepared their Monday night ‘I feel your pain’ speech weeks ago.