Gateway Mall: Nothin’ New to See
On December 12th I told you an announcement was coming in January for the Gateway Mall (see post). Well, Monday was the day with a press conference on the 12th Floor of the lovely Civic Courts building — between 11th and Tucker smack dab in the middle of the Gateway Mall. The big announcement? Nothing!
Despite claims of new items by Rollin Stanley, the city’s Director of Planning who is taking a new job in the DC region next month, we already knew about the 2-block sculpture garden. That would be the one announced before the city asked the public for feedback on the master plan for the too long space (see post from June 11, 2007). We also knew that The Lawrence Group was looking at doing a couple of blocks around their project, The Park Pacific.
Did the Lawrence Group get funding worked out to do those two blocks? Nope. Maybe someone else stepped up to do another area? Nope. Perhaps something new to announce around the sculpture garden? Nope. Well, Mayor Slay indicated a couple of pieces have been purchased by the Gateway Foundation but that doesn’t justify a news conference.
But I was there and took photos and video so I put together a 10-minute video which includes various speakers as well as a collection of images taken from the 12th floor promenade at Civil Courts:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSZoUEL_aCM[/youtube]
CD’s were handed out with the Master Plan on them in a single PDF file. Interestingly the cover and the file on the CD both indicate October 2007. Again, nothing new, although I don’t recall them having the full document available before. Still, I think they’ve had it for months and held onto it until now to drag this into 2008 and timed it just before Stanley’s departure. The city has the PDF available at http://stlouis.missouri.org/citygov/planning/gatewaymall/STLouisGatewayMallMasterPlan.pdf.
The conceptual plan still has lots of bells and whistles — lots of little activity centers strung together by a sidewalk that is supposed to draw us along the path for blocks and blocks. These unfunded spaces will be so compelling that we will get international attention — people will come from all over the world just to see them. Well, maybe a few blocks will get that sort of attention. They are also supposed to draw loft residents, like myself, over to the mall. Unfortunately, that is time where we are not over on Washington, Locust or in other places downtown spending money in shops and restaurants.
Stanley brought out the late 60s argument that we have too many streets — talking about how little space is green relative to street pavement. Their solution is not to narrow Chestnut, as should be done, but close it entirely. The plan also calls for the removal of short term on-street parking along the North side of Market. Taking the place of on-street parking will be a bike lane — a two direction bike lane. A curb will separate cars on Market from an 8ft wide bike lane. Still, a bike lane is not something you can do two blocks at a time so I have to wonder what will become of that space along the sculpture park in the meantime? Will they remove the parking now and do a temporary bike lane without the protection of the curb? The big issue is creating traffic signals in such a way that permit cyclist movement that is not in conflict with turning vehicles. In such a relatively short distance, I think the 2-way bike lane will prove to be another failed experiment.
The press conference offered me a chance to get my camera to the top of the building to take advantage of some great views. But next time guys, actually have something new to share.
the late 60s argument that we have too many streets — talking about how little space is green relative to street pavement. Their solution is not to narrow Chestnut, as should be done, but close it entirely. The plan also calls for the removal of short term on-street parking along the North side of Market.
….oh. My. God.
People STILL THINK THIS WAY?!??
I’m stunned. Amazed. Flabbergasted.
It explains so, so much about the state of St. Louis today.
It should be flagrantly obvious to anyone looking at your photos that the problem is simply too much empty space — streets that are far too wide, and too much empty parkland with not enough generators of activities (ie, BUILDINGS, not idle follies that a person might visit once a year) around them.
And yet they want to close streets. Unfathomable.
….also, that curb sounds like a very good way to send bicyclists flying head-first over their handlebars.
What will happen at the end of the two blocks? Why, a sign will say, “Bike Lane Ends. You’re on your own now, sucker.”
This is a world class plaza? Like the New 64, fake plans for a fake public, perfect. The silly two-block bike lane represents the state of bike advocacy in this anti-green region. People who live in their cars cannot be trusted with this design or any other that doesn’t require a parking lot.
yikes… what are people going to do with a closed street? How are they going to close it, with some beautiful Jersey barriers? If they are determined to close Chestnut, they ought to put a trolly on it that runs west, jogs over to locust, and heads to Grand Center. Now that would be something to have a press conference about. I can’t even fathom what benefit closing Chestnut would have. I feel like the paucity of imagination here is shocking.
Steve, you made me giggle with your questions. I liked it.
Perhaps Stanley isn’t the progressive urban planner we thought……perhaps his new destination fits him more perfectly.
The expanse of this mall to the west of the Courts building should be broken up. Without the continuance of at least the visual axis of the Courts building over the old courthouse dome and under the Arch on the east side (because of the Gateway One building), Kiener Plaza becomes the extent of the open space and is landscaped appropriate to its bounds. Kiener Plaza, as an open space, provides the necessary foreground for the harmony of the old courthouse framed by the legs of the Arch, and because of the monumental presence of the old courthouse there is a recognizable purpose to Kiener Plaza. Pedestrians approaching from all directions, and vehicles eastbound on either Chestnut or Market should sense arrival at an urban place of importance when moving along the edges of this open space. The bounds of this space are well-defined by the solid masses of each the Hilton Hotel complex with Shannon’s restaurant, the Gateway One building, the horrendously ugly twin garages of Kiener East and West and of course the old courthouse. Though these buildings, with exception to the old courthouse, should be of significantly higher architectural quality and offer more public transparency on the street level they at least provide legible bounds to the landscaped space within. The expanse to the west of the Courts building holds no such civic importance, and is ill-defined at the edges because of the discontinuity of buildings and very little public activity at the street level. The only existing open spaces that should really remain open greens are the one block space affronting the public library from the south, Soldier’s Memorial from the north and Park Pacific from the west, the one block space affronting the Soldier’s Memorial from the south and the vacated municipal courts building from the north, the one block space affronting Union Station where the Milles fountain is located, the one block space affronting the old courthouse from the east, performing a similar function to Kiener Plaza, Kiener Plaza, and finally the three block space between the Gateway One building to the east and the Courts building on the west. It’s this better contained and easier to define open space that could be set aside for some type of public green. The Courts building would serve as the honorable host of the space with its obvious civic architectural presence. The remaining edge-providing buildings are currently of moderate to low value at the street level, so smaller commercial installations would be needed to activate the space and give people purpose to go there. The renewed purpose of these three blocks might attract the types of pedestrian friendly businesses anywhere that these indistinct office buildings might provide opportunity. The space is well-served by mass transit (8th & Pine Metrolink station), and at least the Gateway One building provides some street-level food service (former Café DeJeuner at the corner, and of course Dierdorf & Hart’s is there). Placing small food service functions (not kiosks, but permanent fixtures) at the edges of the space would attract pedestrian traffic as needed to populate the space as civic spaces should be, and this is what most poorly designed and therefore deserted public ‘plazas’ lack. Perhaps most important, however, is the uncelebrated connection between the three open blocks to the east of the Gateway One building and Kiener Plaza. If you look at Google Earth, you’ll plainly see that axial line from the Arch, through the old courthouse and Kiener Plaza continues uninterrupted right to the entry stair of the Courts building. I know that Dierdorf & Hart’s uses a large portion of the paved area for their outdoor café style seating, but this would provide some active presence to a pedestrian passage through this space. The remaining open spaces not identified to be retained above (see Google Earth) constitute wasteful expanse and should be built upon to a density appropriate for a downtown central business district.
I guess this is where there is a difference of opinion on what a downtown should have. There are several of you out there that I suspect believe a downtown doesn’t need a single block of green space and that’s what we have tower grove and forest park for. The city planner thinks green space has a positive effect not a negative effect and should be increased in downtown which I agree with. Looking at the pic facing west at the top, the green space of gateway mall is no wider than the concrete of either Market or Chestnut steets. I thought blocks should typically be wider than the physical streets separating them which leads one to suspect if Chestnut is even necessary at all.
So Rob Powers I’m not seeing what you seem to be so certain of that removing Chestnut is wrong. Are you saying Market and Olive can’t hold the extra capacity? Have you walked across those streets? For folks going to and from Wash Av, Chestnut is just one more annoying wide street to cross on foot. Isn’t the point of a downtown is people rely on walking for a lot for their transportation?
Steve if you’re implying this project is sputtering/dying I suspect you’re correct (no invester). I think you’re pleased with this because you feel this real-estate should be used for retail or residential and tax producing not tax draining. I think a big park there would be kind of cool though.
First of all there is already a huge park under the arch that is not used anywhere near capacity. Parks are cool, however the ability to fill them or other public spaces requires a threshold of activity either through commercial, residential, transit or other means. This is city planning 101. Closing down Chestnut will do nothing. At this point I’m glad Rollin Stanley is leaving, it is clear he does not have the guts to stand up for principle.
In fact look at how similar the arch grounds are to the mall. The area surrounding the arch grounds was poorly conceived in relation to it’s surroundings and now 50 years later the Danforth Foundation is proposing to correct the problem.
This new proposal for the Gateway Mall is just as poorly done. It is unlikely it will become a destination of any note, and in fifty years will need to be corrected.
If you step back and look at the situation, the heart of the city is a half ass planning disaster. No wonder St. Louis cannot manage to crawl back into the national prominence it had at the turn of the previous century.
Instead of the Danforth Foundation veering off one direction and the Mayor promoting a half way solution for the Mall, it all needs to be all brought together with a comprehensive plan that addresses the many failings of this downtown area.
An international architectural competition would be preferable, it would help bring debate into the open, it would give birth to many interesting solutions and it would get the attention of Congress, who has to pass on anything involving the arch. In any case the citizens should be part of the process. It should be clear back room deals and dumping solutions in the lap of the public has not worked. This current Gateway Mall solution is another example of this arrogance of governance.
Thanks for the picture – another great illustration of what’s wrong with the mall. Commonwealth in Boston – which many like to compare this to (unfairly) must carry much more traffic than Market St./etc. and yet it’s just two lanes with one lane of parking (IIRC) and just two lanes with no parking on the cross streets. I count 8 freakin’ lanes of traffic/parking on the north and south side of the mall and probably 6 in between blocks. This isn’t human scale and humans won’t use it. Not to mention people don’t live along (or near) the mall in adequate density to make it a busy place.
GMichaud,
Touched a nerver? off your meds tonight? The only thing St. Louis is in debt to the Danforth Foundbation for is the title of ‘Captain Obvious’ that 55/70 limits citizens’ acces to the arch front. That and a level of pretentiousness that only Bono rivals. It’s not like they’re going to contribute any benjamins to fix the problem. Try to remember the Gateway Mall is the topic of the thread.
No money to implement = another study sitting on the shelf!
Hooray GMichaud!!! Someone gets it! ‘Dude’, I think you need to understand that planning issues have no bounds with regard to the ultimate point of planning, which is of course to promote connectivity of urban places through our building activities. The use of the Arch grounds as a comparative example in argument is exactly what we SHOULD be doing, becase as GMichaud has rightly pointed out, we continue to repeat the mistakes of our past because we don’t seem to care to learn from them. While the Arch grounds unto itself is beautifully composed and quite the complement to the pure modernist form of the Arch, is has it’s own set of problems that demands the high profile attention that former Senator Danforth is bringing to it. Without the vital activation of public movement and true use of space, these urban parks are of little value, and yes, this is absolutely Planning 101. I’m in 100% agreement with GMichaud’s comments, and especially the matter of design competition entertainment, however I’m confident that there is enough talent locally that would not only welcome the opportunity, but of course are personally familiar with the issues of St. Louis. I would rather hear the opinions of the many competent local talents than that of Mr. Libeskind, Ms. Hadid, or Mr. Eisenman.
And, perhaps most importantly, the involvement of local individuals who are already intertwined with the St. Louis business community and property owners would increase interest in these issues exponentially because they would finally feel that they have a had a meaningful role in the ultimate decisions being made. The public involvement would beget public interest in follow-up as there would clearly be much anticipation of the reaction to proposals. Without the opinions and ideas of the public being solicited, there is usually little to care about regarding issues like these. Democracy, even in qualified form, is a powerful thing.
What I find incredible is that here we are, in late January 2008, and the pansies along Market Street are still blooming! That is freaking amazing!
They’ll be blanketed in white stuff this afternoon.
Any talk about narrowing Chestnut? It is so absurdly wide considering it’s a one-way street.
While it may be possible another study will sit on the shelf, what is the alternate, wing it? Actually an international competition is not really a study and its visibility and even acting upon such a effort denotes a level of commitment.
However in this town the priority is giving multi million dollar tax breaks to multi millionaires for Busch Stadium and other projects. The money is there to implement a project if we stop giving away tax money to the wealthy for projects they will do anyway.
The point is that now is an excellent time to access what is going on with the Gateway Mall and the Arch Grounds. They are connected, not only with proximity, but with purpose also. In fact it is rather maddening that the piecemeal approach has been taken and the results are bound to be less than satisfactory. Like Steve says the plan has a lot of bells and whistles but is it going to have the impact to draw loft residents, much less tourists from out of town?
Another way to ask that same question would be what sort of experience should Steve or other residents living in downtown lofts have if they want to walk to the arch grounds? Or another, if a tourist visits and walks around downtown, is there a reason they would visit the mall the way they visit the arch? In fact everything is so chopped up and desolate right now you feel like you are walking along a highway if you walk down Market Street. Sculptures in the mall might help, but nothing else in the surrounding city environment compliments that concept.
Finally I think an international competition would be better than rely on local talent. I realize there is design ability locally if there is an opportunity, but international designers will have more experience in designing urban environments than anyone local. The Arch was the product of an American competition, and it is unlikely only local designers would have come up with something as dramatic, in fact they didn’t, they were free to enter the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial Competition also.
GMichaud- You lost me… I’m sure if I follow your logic. You say “international designers will have more experience in designing urban environments than anyone local”, but I’m wondering if you could explain how international designers have more experience designing urban environments. The dearth of quality urban spaces and incongruent pieces is not the result of unknowledgeable or incompetent local design effort, but rather of a large lack of desire in the development and governmental circles to do what is right. I would submit that there is really little that an international competition would reveal about urban design intuition that couldn’t gleaned from local talent and interest in the city. The fact that Saarinen was selected as the designer of the Jefferson Expansion Memorial has little to do with the fact that he was Finnish (or of any other nationality), especially considering the fact that he was largely educated in the field of architectural design in the US. I believe you might be pleasantly surprised to see the level of talent in the city, and that able talent to propose very appropriate solutions to our own urban design problems. Perhaps you can explain how originating from a place other than St. Louis affords a designer an insight exclusive to outsiders.
John W. there is a strong urban continuity in Europe. Their urban environments are much more sophisticated than you will find in America except for maybe a few cities(New York, San Francisco etc). I will speak about Helsinki and Finland, which I know a better than some others. The Helsinki city planning agency regularly uses architectural competitions as a tool in city planning, in one case, and I can’t remember the district in Helsinki right now, they took parts of several of different entries to fulfill their needs. It is a highly developed city planning process that regularly uses competitions to find solutions for problems.
Or compare the new multi modal station in St. Louis which is isolated over railroad tracks to the central rail station in Helsinki, designed by Eero Saarinens father Elliel. It is in a central location, with a streetcar stopping in front of the Plaza, you can sit outside at a cafe and watch the people in the plaza in front of the station and walking to and fro to the many surrounding commercial buildings facing the plaza where Saarinens rail station sits. You can go anywhere in Finland, or the world for that matter from that one spot in Helsinki. It is a vital public space.
Again compare that to the multi modal station in St. Louis, it might of worked if they could of somehow moved the station into the Gateway Mall, but it is another fragment in a city full of fragments. There is not an understanding of how to create urban space, public space and connecting that space with the rest of the city.
Just as you would give an architectural firm with a background in medical facilities, such as Christner Partnership, a hospital job over a firm without that experience, it follows that firms around the world that deal with true urban design on a regular basis will probably offer innovative solutions that American designers have never had the opportunity to work on.
The truth is the urban planning is so mediocre in St. Louis, it is hard to describe. The fact that the Danforth Foundation and the Mayor even recognize the short comings of the arch grounds indicates just how bad the urban planning is in St. Louis. This Gateway Mall discussion is more of the same. No matter how much the corporate and political leadership beat their breasts about art (sculpture parks, art districts and the like), the fact is they have not a clue what art really is, especially when it comes to building cities. To them art is only a marketing tool, not something real.
So the bottom line is architects and urban planners in St. Louis and for the most part America, don’t work in an environment where art is appreciated. But if the local talent is as great as you say, then they should have no fear competing against designers from the rest of the world.
By the way you would probably enjoy the site Death by Architecture (www.deathbyarchitecture.com). It is about architectural competitions.
GMichaud- The level of sophistication of urban environments throughout the world in comparison to the US when referring to native talent is saying little, I’m afraid. However, saying that the Helsinki Planning Agency regularly uses architectural competitions as a tool in city planning is saying quite a lot. City administrations, or even groups unaffiliated with government entertaining design competitions to gauge public interest in and ideas about urban design would move our city away from the disappointing mediocrity you find difficult to describe. You continue that “[Helsinki makes use of] a highly developed city planning process that regularly uses competitions to find solutions for problems. Yes. Exactly. This is just what is needed in this city and in any city really, that lacks the direction needed to cohere around community supported ideas. You then incorrectly follow that “there is not an understanding of how to create urban space, public space and connecting that space with the rest of the cityâ€, presumably lumping all local design talent into the same pile of failure that has been the history of planning in St. Louis over the last few generations. This statement, quite frankly, is puzzling to me. How, in the virtual absence of any city provided venue for local designers to shape the physical nature of this city, can you be so absolutely sure that native talent is without the necessary understanding of good urban design to move the city in a positive direction? Your post seems to suggest that local designers are somehow unaware of the nature of cities in other parts of the world. I can assure you that suggestion is nearly, if not completely opposite of the truth. Query architectural designers in the city and what you’ll find is a very thorough understanding of urban composition in the cities of the world, not only most having likely studied in these cities but reliably looking to them for example. Are many cities of the world far more successful at urban design than those in the US? Clearly. Is the disparity in urban design quality between those great cities of the world and St. Louis, for instance, a result of vacant urban design understanding? Clearly not. If your bottom line is that “architects and urban planners in St. Louis and for the most part America, don’t work in an environment where art is appreciatedâ€, then you seem to place a large degree of blame for poor urban design in St. Louis on the design community, rather than on the machines that put urban design activity into motion. It seems that you don’t trust local talent to demonstrate strong urban design intuition and reflect a deep understanding of the city’s current planning deficiencies. I am certain that given an opportunity to participate in the shaping of this city, the eager local talent would not be in fear of international competition, because why in the world would they be? I’m confident that local talent knows and cares much more about the conditions of St. Louis that Jean Nouvel or Rem Koolhaas likely ever will. Architectural designers are really planners when assembling space and making critical connections and adjancies, and regardless of narrow market slice such as hospital design specialty, retail design specialty, education facilities design specialty or any other design specialty architectural designers are up to the challenge of planning, so no GMichaud, there is little reason to compartmentalize urban design as you are apparently believe is necessary. I have visited Death by Architecture many, many times over the years, but of course we’re not talking about random competitions in random locations but instead, St. Louis.
You are misunderstanding me John W. I am not saying the talent doesn’t exist in St. Louis to do competent urban planning, I’m saying the way the government works in St. Louis there is never an opportunity to practice their craft in the proper manner. Nor am I trying to compartmentalize urban design, I am simply saying just as an architect working on his or her first health care project may not be able to pick up nuances the way someone who has a great deal of experience in medical facilities. In the same way local planners/architects are at a disadvantage because they have not been testing ideas at an urban scale the way counterparts in other parts of the world who work in cities that value urban planning.
Local design professionals do have some fault here. A professional organization like the AIA is largely silent concerning many critical issues. In addition other than Urban Review and a few other blogs, individual architects and urban planners don’t do a very good job of raising hell. The design profession is too silent, especially considering the disastrous state of planning in St. Louis. The design profession has failed miserably in making the environment an important part of everyday life and discussion. Nor does help that our school system through the college years ignore urban design as a subject. (Thus it leads to the carte blanche to produce urban sprawl).
One of the problems is that poor planning is difficult to see without offering alternatives. Hence the one sided Gateway Mall sculpture park proposal looks good because there is nothing to compare it to. Even the Danforth Foundation presenting alternative plans for the arch grounds represents a closed process. I’m not sure how they chose the candidates, but in my view none of the solutions offered are close to solving the problem of connecting the arch grounds with the city. But at least there is now a public dialog about the arch grounds. The real question is whether they enhance that dialog or turn the process back over to a few favored designers.
My point about an international competition is that it would create visibility on a national and international scale while introducing many ideas for solving the problems of the Gateway Mall and the Arch grounds. It would bring the public into the process also, educating and offering choices on how we want to live as a society. It would help spur very public debate about our environment.
Handing the design job off to a local design professional, who would probably be politically connected, would unlikely address many problems, nor would it create a healthy discussion and greater awareness of the city. A good example of this is the subject of this post, the Gateway Mall Sculpture Park and the way it has been thrust onto the public. It has all of these faults and it fails to address many urban planning concerns expressed by Steve and the many posters on this site.
There is no doubt local designers who could do a great job, but without an open process they will never get a chance. And hey, it would be a super opportunity to compete against Koolhaas or Jean Nouvel. That could be a great thing, not only for St. Louis, but for our designers also; that is the visibility factor.
I cannot deny that an international competition featuring many fabled starchitects would bring attention to our midwestern US city, because certainly it would. However, I believe we can start locally before deferring to those abroad who are presumed by some to be more capable of quality urban design. Local design competitions can provide the necessary venue for those in the city who have been thinking of solutions to our urban design woes for some time. If the city shows little interest in such an approach, there is little to stop local interest in organizing competitions despite. You say that local designers don’t do a very good job of raising hell, and I say this is just the way to do that.
Frank Lloyd Wright would walk into a room with his cape swinging, everyone knew he arrived. He was a great architect, and also great at marketing his architecture. Steve Patterson of Urban Review has some of those same marketing flourishes; it creates visibility, awareness and debate. (I’m not sure Steve has a cape though).
Yes it would be great to have local competitions for architecture and urban planning, organized locally rather than by the political establishment. The recent charrette at Old North St. Louis appears to be a missed opportunity in that regard. I read about its occurrence, but never saw a discussion of the results in the blogs or media. The Old North website has a small discussion of recommendations, and they sound good, except a much more visible final report should have occurred to mirror the effort of organizing the event. The report should be timely.
If the local media would not show up for the charrette then press releases should have blanketed the community about the results. When I was in the Army and with the Army Information Office we would do our own writing, photography and even film production and take it to TV stations and print news media for publication. We had a high success rate, partly because we were the Army, but also because we made it easy for the press to use the material supplied to them.
It is a tremendous commitment, but I agree it would be a good way to address and even compete with proposals such as the Sculpture Park in the Gateway Mall.
At least some good discussion could occur instead of the current politburo style of governing.
We’ll all have capes when invigorated by a healthy number of local design competitions, and it won’t be about idol worship. I inquired a number of times about who may be going to the 14th street mall charette and who would please report their experience. I’ve done that here and on other blogs, and even pursuaded a coworker to attend the event and contribute. This blog serves an important purpose, and it may just be that we’re witnessing the beginning of an awakening. I only just discovered this and other related urban affair blogs during last summer, and have been very inspired by the enterprising courage of microdevelopers such as EcoUrban Homes. I’ve read many posts from many folks here and on the other known blogs a strong desire to contribute to a progressive urban revitalization cause through action. There was a protest organized to raise awareness of the Blairmont situation in the north side this weekend for instance, and that’s just one effective way to register concern. Another great way to register concern and also relay well-considered thoughts about city revitalization is through design competition and local exhibitions of works and ideas. I hope to work toward bringing this type of creative and democratic involvement in city progress into light. Let’s move forward.
Michael Allen of Landmarks Association presented a lecture with slide imagery of the history of the Gateway Mall this afternoon. The imressively well-attended lecture was very informative, as expected, and there was a Q & A afterward. Someone asked if a statement could be provided to summarize what was supposed to be learned by the presentation, recalling the tendancy of architects and planners to cyclically reject most recent generational offerings to civic design in favor of long past and original efforts to shape the city. The question clearly reflected the frustration with the usual inability to define and solve long-standing urban design problems. The answer to the question, as delivered my Michael, was that public parks are for people and their design should reflect that. The tone of his answer was not dismissive of the ability of the knowledgeable and talented to transcend this problem, but instead clearly indicated that proper design should be given its chance to shine. Michael continued that recent efforts endorsed by the city show that this critical point of human-scaled design has largely been missed. The current proposal appears to have been conceived from a bird’s eye vantage point, and seems sure to create more unused urban waste. I believe there are many in this city that would appreciate an opportunity to be a part of the shaping of this assemblage of these poorly defined blocks.
The whole idea is soooooooo sooooooo St. Louis. It fits right in. As Larry Salci would say: It fits right in with St. Louis, and it’s bunch of @#@##%ing clowns! The whole problem with this city is the big dog planners do just that! They sit around in some cushy office and dream up a lot of plans that look good on paper. But they never get up off their butts and get outside and try their ideas on for size themselves. If they did they would know better than this.
Then perhaps all of dreampt up plans by those big dog planners should be subject to wide open public scrutiny at the preliminary sketch stages of those dreams. Make them available to defend their proposals, and I think you’d be surprised at the number of citizens interested in civic issues showing up to hear and react.
And in other cities, the private sector takes the lead and gets things done: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08114/875560-28.stm