St Louis Removes Josephine Baker
Well not the person, she is long dead. however, a block-long section of Josephine Baker Blvd between Washington and Locust is being removed (map link), presumably for an undisclosed parking plan for Saint Louis University:
In June of last year myself and others covered the razing of the historic Livery building at the NW corner of Locust & Josephine Baker. I’m sure now that vacating this street was part of the bigger plan that is slowly being revealed.
Architect Paul Hohmann over at Vanishing STL does an excellent job covering this topic in his piece called, “SLU Creates Superblock Between LBD & Grand Center, Hinders Development.” Here is a snip it of his piece:
The simplicity and flexibility of the urban street grid is what separates the City and its inner suburbs from post WWII suburbs which are more often than not defined by cul-de-sacs and overcrowded collector roads. Unfortunately, the City of St. Louis does not recognize the inherent value of it’s streets and often gives away, yes, gives away these assets to private hands.
This is the case in Midtown where SLU has persuaded the City to vacate Josephine Baker between Locust and Washington creating a superblock about 870 feet long. This is twice as long as today’s city planners recommend to create a walkable environment in an urban area. Longer blocks also increase vehicle travel speeds due to the distance between intersections.
Paul is right, of course, to raise alarm about the continual loss of streets and their sidewalks.
To the immediate South is the Drake Plaza apartments which were likely renovated in the 1980s. At that time the street grid in this vicinity was butchered to give the place gated parking. Both Josephine Baker and Leonard were cut off at Locust. Another street used to angle between the buildings.
But in an interesting bit of irony these closed streets around the Drake Plaza are causing problems of connectivity for SLU. The image above is looking North at what used to be Josephine Baker Blvd (anyone know the prior name of the street?) before being closed for Drake Plaza parking. So SLU buys the building next door and turns the side parking lot into basically a private street.
At least it is nice to see we are coming full circle and having to add back in connectivity in places.  I’m concerned about the accessibility in the area with all these changes. This gives folks in wheelchairs fewer crosswalks. We’ve been messing up the street grid for decades so this is just more of the same, and all for parking!
But good thing the arena is built — my academics experience at SLU this year should be so much better than before.
Josephine Baker Blvd. was once Channing Street. It won’t be long before SLU and Wash U. take over all the real estate between Grand Center and Clayton. Each is already practically a municipality unto itself.
Street was previously Channing, changed in 1989.
The whole process is reflective of the current SLU administration’s conscious decision to go from an urban university connected to the surrounding neigbhorhood to “fortress SLU.” Years ago (when I attended in the late ’70s), students and faculty supported Garavelli’s, El Serape, the Mammer Jammer, Mojo’s Barbecue and other restaurants near but outside of the SLU campus. (The latter three were clustered near the intersection of Channing and Olive.)
Rather than working with the adjoining or nearby communities to solve ongoing security problems (see also: WashU and the Loop and several other neighborhoods), SLU actively discouraged its community from venturing off campus. This wasn’t the only reason that Grand Center has basically been a failure since it was organized, but it hasn’t helped.
If you’re studying urban planning at SLU, the real-life case studies can’t be encouraging.
slp –LOL, we do have numerous close examples of what not to do.]
So the SLU facilities folks don’t talk to the academics? What a surprise!
Josephine Baker was the turning point in this race I did a few months back (http://www.ewrollonriver.com/) I went by there today on my lunch run and I asked one of the contractors what was going to happen to this parcel of land. He stated it was just going to be green space. So I asked specifically: “So it’s not going to be used for parking?†And he answered no. Now, he could just be lying to me because he might think I’d post what he said on some blog or something.
^^ More green space is exactly what Grand Center needs.
There seems to be so many complaints/observations/criticisms, and I think I do understand the bulk of observations here about accessibility, street design and public land use in private hands, the underlying issue or inference felt when reading this seems to hint at the realities changed in institutions of higher learning.
.
The competitive nature and the changing realities in the institutions of higher learning are widespread across the U.S. There is much written about the subject and even a few good documentaries. I would not blaze any new ground on the matter, probably only repeat more astute original observations made by others; but it is interesting to me that many of the things levied against SLU and perhaps others is exactly the reality of the whole system.
.
So my question involves that of the nature of the “industry”? Is SLU this uncaring, unsympathetic behemoth you imply or is it merely reacting to market realities of its industry? If that is true, which is what I obviously seem to think, shouldn’t some focus or attention be paid to that which is the root cause and not just the symptoms of this issue?
.
SLU is faced with the reality, grow and attract “customers” or cease in relevance. This is not to excuse what you might see as abuses or mismanagement, just me trying to understand the real issue at hand. Since SLU is somewhat landlocked by all of the underutilized structures and faced with the need to grow with pertinent structures and infastructures needed to attract students and maintain relationships with Alumni, it seems only right that those issues of reality be faced or tempered with the opinions levied.
.
I think your views are often tempered with other potential solutions, which is why I enjoy what you write. Too often, too many complain without any solutions to the realities faced and simply want the world to mirror their perspective or everyone is wrong unless it is viewed by standards they set. So getting to the realities faced by those being criticized seems very important in establishing potential criticisms or reccomendations of alternatives to the plan at hand.
Too bad that section on Locust has been destroyed to further support the car culture and its needs. Just another example of typical Lou policies, ugly.
John M–
I’ve been a vocal critic of SLU for some time now. Most who listen to my rants say that I’m not taking in all the realities of the situation: SLU is a university, not an urban developer or non-profit. Their stake is in increasing enrollment/endowment, not necessarily (or sometimes not at all) urban vitality.
All of that’s true.
But where is our leadership in all of this? When you have a private/semi-private entity inviting havoc onto the landscape, where is the leader to step up and offer a better solution?
If I were alderman of the area, I would have nipped this in the bud a long time ago. The Livery Stable would still be standing, as would be that pretty Second Empire on Lindell they just demolished, as would the Wagner House, as would the Central Apartments. These are historic resources that were needlessly lost in a neighborhood that couldn’t afford to lose them. As the area’s leader, I would have offered SLU alternatives for all of these various demolition scenarios. I would have helped them develop a campus parking plan so that no new surface lots would need to be created than already exist. In fact, many can be consolidated.
I would have suggested that they replace, build atop, or add on to the Olive-Compton garage in order to accommodate Arena traffic. I would then suggest that, if they redesign, include retail/restaurants in the bottom for pre-game or pre-show eats and drinks.
A leader should lead; should direct an entity that receives public funding to the highest level of benefit for the public in any development. Our alderman are too powerful to sit back, throw their hands up, and let SLU trample Midtown.
That said, I do think that SLU has been a little extreme in urban destruction, even having its own interest somewhat separate from the larger city (short-sighted as that is). I think that a Jesuit institution should be more attuned to poverty and what keeps neighborhoods in it. Vacant lots, surface parking, and general lifelessness aren’t the solution to the problems of Grand Center/Midtown.
The pragmatic view is all well and true, but the way cities operate should be checks and balances–one extreme counteracting the other (in this case, extreme destruction vs. extreme preservation). That’s where the middle ground is achieved.
Yes, SLU needs to consider the market and probably has a legitimate need to expand, but SLU could use the land they already own in far more efficient ways. What they have done to the corner of Grand and Chouteau is inexcusable and is the biggest waste of space I’ve seen outside of a clover leaf. I doubt many people choose their college based on the number of fountains there are on campus. However, a university campus that is adjacent to thriving neighborhoods with strong commercial streets would be very appealing to many.
Couple of observations:
1) This constant complaining of SLU is getting old. This is a classic case of being damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Nothing they do in the neighborhood will ever be good enough. Thankfully, the administrators gave up trying to appease everyone long ago and started taking care of the university.
2) You would be shocked at how many students are influenced by the campus (statues, fountains, copious landscaping, iron gates) when making their decision on where to attend. Even further, if truth be told the majority of undergrads would just as prefer Grand Blvd be shut down through campus than get rid of the gates that surround the place. Remember most the student at SLU ARE from the suburbs.
3)Don’t look now, but a little digging may uncover changes in ownership to that wonderful looking building on the southeast corner of Grand and Forest Park Parkway. I think it is fair to say Del Tacos days may be numbered. Haha, SLU strikes again…
How comforting to hear that an institution of high learning prefers students who favor the Fountain & Gate Indices over less important matters such as the number of associated Nobel Prize laureates. Truth be told, SUV parking is more important for SLUburbs who adore junk food too.
I attended George Washington University in DC, which is five blocks from the White House in the very dense urban core of the city. GWU, despite owning 20 blocks or more, has only over the last thirty years of expansion closed ONE block of street on its campus. While not perfect, GWU embraces its urban environment and builds high density buildings as often as possible. SLU needs to realize that it cannot successfully create a campus such as Mizzou’s or U of I’s. Well, they can, but it will destroy Midtown.
You will find MANY urban campuses that do not destroy the whole surrounding community and try to turn it into one big gated-community so the student never has to venture out onto a city street. This is insane. Even at Mizzou, GWU (as mentioned above) and countless others, small connector streets are left for the street grid to remain. Maybe SLU should take a few of their GREEN spaces (with the horrible Biondi sculptures strewn-about) and integrate some parking into them, instead of tearing down stratigically located and historically significant buildings!!
“This is a classic case of being damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Nothing they do in the neighborhood will ever be good enough.”
I don’t believe this for a second.
I like your idea matt, about adding height to the Olive&Compton Garage. While many parking structures are designed with this potential eventuality of additional traffic, I have in 13 plus years in the business, never seen it. I don’t know why that option is almost never used.
.
Silly Locals, and your commentary makes SLU unique how?
.
I am still trying to figure out how SLU has destoyed midtown? I don’t see it. I love architecture and history as much as some of you here, and am saddened by many lost buildings, although I am partial to the larger ones lost than individual mansions, but if the building being saved serves nobody, what have you really accomplished? It is my belief that SLU has added more to Midtown than taken away for itself. I am not denying that some of its supposed improvements are not to my liking, or that Father Biondi and I hold the same feel for art, but public art in a private university setting is not my concern.
.
Everyone here would make different decisions. As far as comparing the density of GWU to SLU, are you trying to compare the density of Washington D.C. to St. Louis Midtown. Almost twice as many people live in the roughly the same area as St. Louis City or they have about as many people as St. Louis city did in its peak and accordingly people developed with a different set of guidelines to dense structures back in that time. So I do not think it is a fair comparison of how SLU should conduct themselves in regards to development of a contemporary St. Louis.
.
The livery building counts as one of these significant structures? Bear in mind I love St. Louis, and adore much of its history and am fascinated by almost everything I ever learned about it, especially 1880’s through to the 1980’s. So I ask that question not in thinking I know the answer, but in wondering when weighed against progress. Which building offered more than what was gained by its absence? Which structure should I as a history loving St. Louisan be upset with, at its demise, had I been paying attention?
Based on a quick drive by before class yesterday (for Urban Planning), this will be green space. Ridiculous.
Okay yes SLU can and is greedy however you can’t blame them we the people of St. Louis let them. Never complain about what you tolerated and this is the way of America and it’s money driven society. Whoever has the money has the power.
SLU developments are deleting specific parts of St. Louis history and only one of you have complained about that. Why do we always fight about the wrong things or issues? I say if your going to fight atleast let it be for something worth while. I think the maintaining of our history is worthwhile. History is the love story, epic tale, achievements and defeats of the people who lived before us that make us who are are today.
Our fighting over SLU taking over land proves that the next generation has their work to cut out for them since we are to lazy and to narrow sighted and minded to look beyond out own agendas.
Proposed solution to SLU for the deletion of Josephine Bakers street and other streets.
1. Possibly name the building/parking lot or land scape after the street your deleting
2. Post a plaque that gives a small gist based history of that area. This could even be a student based project. Where students actually build the sculpture or plaque to be displayed.
3 Leave the street sign up at the closes intersection where the original street existed.
4. Involve the MO History Museum to aid you in the adventure of keeping the history of St. Louis while achieveing your Universities flight to expand.
We are all smart people the above are more reasonable solutions instead of arguments.
Lets be a part of the solution not the PROBLEM!
I like Josephine Baker park. Sounds good to me. But I don’t see a street being named after you as all that great of an honor. Certainly a far cry from a history lesson. As far as eliminating that street, I don’t see the hubub. It wasn’t serving anyone. There are no businesses that will be affected. Nobody faced that street. And besides one block to the east allows the same ingress and egress to Locust street.
.
I asked which projects that SLU took on that was a direct affront to legitimate preservation efforts needed for the area. As an example I was saddened and present the night the wrecking ball went into the Century Building. It was like a bad dream.
.
Carolyn Toft does tireless work and explains her point well on worthwhile structures for preservation. I think much of her work up to and including joining, but that does not mean progress should be eliminated. Change is neccessary and essential. Sometimes it is better not to look back, but forward. As a fifth generation St. Louisan I not only see history in St. Louis but a family history of my own that runs all over this place.