St. Louis needs greater density
“Dense concentrations of people are one of the of the necessary conditions for flourishing city diversity.”
The above quote is from Jane Jacobs’ classic, ‘The Death and Life of Great American Cities.’ In chapter 11, ‘The need for concentration,’ Jacobs continues:
“One reason why low city densities conventionally have a good name, unjustified by the facts, and why high city densities have a bad name, equally unjustified, is that high densities of dwellings and and overcrowding of dwellings are often confused. High densities mean large numbers of dwellings per acre of land. Overcrowding means too many people in a dwelling for the number of rooms it contains.”
I think all too often in St. Louis this confusion abounds. The trend to convert two-family buildings to a single family structure is in part because of the false notion that we need to reduce densities. I hear it all the time. What do we accomplish by reducing the total number of dwellings in this fashion? We make it harder to create a vibrant & diverse city. While I don’t have any facts & figures in front of me I’d say we are probably only breaking even as far as dwellings are concerned. For every new house or loft constructed we are reducing a four-unit building to two or a two to a single. Downtown is gaining units while the other neighborhoods are losing needed density. This is not a good thing!
Back to Jane Jacobs, “In districts where densities are too low, they can be raised and variation increased by adding new buildings simultaneously in different, separated spots only. In short, densities should be raised – and new buildings introduced for this purpose – gradually rather than in some sudden, cataclysmic upheaval to be followed by nothing more for decades. “
Jacobs is not advocating wholesale destruction of neighborhoods to create high density housing – she is suggesting over time cities need to increase densities to a level to support a diverse & vibrant city life. The ideal place for increased density is near MetroLink stops – both current and future. Most city neighborhoods are low density and need more dwellings and people – not fewer.
Jacobs’ book will be discussed Sunday 12/12 at 1pm. The location is Grbic at 4071 Keokuk (@ Meramec).
– Steve
SLU’s big biolab on Grand is a waste of the only large assembly of usable land near the Grand Avenue MetroLink that could be used for high-density residential construction. What a shame. Their plans call for a huge tower in the middle of a barren lot, with the tower occupiying less than 10% of the lot! Horrible. This is the station that I plan to use when I move to Forest Park Southeast in late January. Expect many declarations of frustration with this area in my ‘blog this spring.
Although the Washington University medical cxampus is high-density, its planners have choked out the chance for positive uses around the SWE MetroLink station. There could be flower shops like the one the smashed in 1998, a newsstand, coffee/donut shops like those you’ll find built into Chicago El stations, etc. around the station entrance and back around on Taylor, where they have built parking lots. (I thank Magee’s at Clayton and Taylor for bravely remaining as the lone occupied storefront in this area.) They could integrate housing in the middle of this area, too, which would surely appeal to med professionals wanting to walk to work and to CWE attractions. Instead, they have built up the area with blank, dead sidewalk space and have made it difficult to find one’s way from Taylor — which ties into residential Forest Park Southeast to the south — to the MetroLink station.
The Forest Park and Delmar stations have fared pretty well but could certainly use further dense development, especially in terms of housing. I am more optimistic about the Delmar station’s potential due to the growing vibrance of the Delmar area. The Forest Park station’s surroundings are rather dead, although more shops could draw upon the large residential population there.
And we all know what should be done with the Laclede’s Landing station. Why the Switzer Building still sits empty is a mystery.
I have recently been in the Switzer building. It as close to gone as I have seen in my experience. That is not to say that it could not be done, but it would take an extremely brave soul. Shame on the city for allowing property owners to so terribly neglect their buildings.
In an article titled “City of Children” author Elizabeth Sullivan of the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association makes some excellent points for higher density in urban areas.
She states “Density is a bad word among many of the self-proclaimed neighborhood leaders in San Francisco; in practice everyone seems to like it just fine. Most San Franciscans love to walk to meet friends for brunch; they love obscure film festivals, ethnic groceries, and other cultural amenities that can only exist when they are supported by a high local concentration of people. And property values in the highest-density neighborhoods are always higher than in the rest of the city, suggesting that lots of people want to live in those neighborhoods… the conveniences of neighborhood shopping are directly dependent on how many people live within walking distance. We need to add more people to support more city amenities.”
She has much more to say on this and other issues which affect an urban neighborhood’s friendliness to famlies. The link is below if you want to check out the rest of the article.
http://www.spur.org/documents/040601_article_01.shtm
I hope you will endulge me in one more quote from this article because it is, in my humble opinion, excellent (emphasis is mine).
Elizabeth ends her article by saying “I have this daydream of a future San Francisco where my little son could someday be sent out to buy the bread for dinner like children in movies set in Paris. Or ride his bicycle to a music lesson or basketball game. HE DESERVES THE EXPERIENCE OF DISCOVERING THE MAGIC OF THIS CITY ON HIS OWN, AS HE GROWS UP, NOT JUST WATCHING IT PASS IN A BLUR FROM THE BACKSEAT OF A CAR. I am sure we would all agree that the ultimate goal is to have soulful, vital places in our city where families can live and thrive. We need neighborhoods safe for children and adults alike, and streets that are free of dangerous congestion. The best and most effective way to do this is to GROW our city, intelligently.”
We'r ed hardy outlet one of the most profession
of the coolest and latest ed hardy apparel, such as
ed hardy tee ,ed hardy bags,
ed hardy bathing suits, ed hardy shoes,
ed hardy board shorts ， don ed hardyt,ed hardy tank tops, ed hardy for women,
ed hardy swimwearand more,
ed hardy clothing. We offers a wide selection of fashion
cheap ed hardyproducts. Welcome to our shop or just enjoy browsing through our stunning collection available wholesale ed hardy in our shop.
our goal is to delight you with our distinctive collection of mindful ed hardy products while providing value and excellent service. Our goal is 100% customer satisfaction and we offer only 100% satisfacted service and ed hardy products. Please feel free to contact us at any time; we are committed to your 100% customer satisfaction. If you're looking for the best service and best selection, stay right where you are and continue shopping at here is your best online choice for the reasonable prices. So why not buy your ed hardy now, I am sure they we won’t let you down.