“A Good Old Building Is Better Than A Bad New One”

I ran across an interesting commentary on St. Louis:

Except for the arch and the old courthouse, which form some genuinely provocative urban views, downtown St. Louis is a monument to chamber of commerce planning and design. It is a businessman’s dream of redevelopment come true.There are all the faceless, characterless, scaleless symbols of economic regeneration — luxury apartments, hotels, a 50,000 seat stadium and multiple parking garages for 7,400 cars. Sleek, new, prosperous, stolid and dull, well served by superhighways, the buildings are a collection of familiar profit formulas, uninspired in concept, unvarying in scale, unrelated by any standards, principals or subtleties of planning or urban design. They just stand there. They come round, rectangular, singly and in pairs. Pick your standard commercial cliche.

The new St. Louis is a success economically and a failure urbanistically. It has the impersonal gloss of a promotional brochure. A prime example of the modern landscape of urban alienation, it has gained a lot of real estate and lost a historic city.

Wow, pretty harsh words. Tragically they are nearly as true today as the day they were first published — February 4, 1968. Yes, the words above are from nearly forty years ago.

Ada Louise Huxtable, Architecture Critic for the New York Times from 1963 – 1982, had plenty to say about Architecture and planning. I read a compilation of articles called Goodbye History, Hello Hamburger: An Anthology of Architectural Delights and Disasters while I was in architecture school in the late 80’s. Today while boxing up some stuff I ran across the book, long since forgotten. I recall enjoying her writing when I was in college so I look forward to re-reading the book to see how her views have stood up to the test of time and my own personal experiences in the last 15 years.

I’ll leave you with another quote from Huxtable. Remember that in 1968 our symphony hall, Powell Hall, had just opened:

The success of Powell Symphony Hall in St. Louis is probably going to lead a lot of people to a lot of wrong conclusions. In a kind of architectural Gresham’s law, the right thing wrongly interpreted usually has more bad than good results.

The first wrong conclusion is that Powell Hall represents the triumph of traditional over modern architecture. False. The correct conclusion here is that a good old building is better than a bad new one. Powell Hall represents the triumph simply of suitable preservation. And, one might add, of rare good sense.

Ms Huxtable was awarded the first Pulitzer Prize for distinguished criticism in 1970.

– Steve

Reversing Trends Since WWII

I’m heading downtown in a few minutes for the First Friday Gallery & Design Walk. One stop will be modern furniture store, The Ambiente Collection, located at 10th and Locust.

I happened to be in the hell known as Manchester Road at 141 in far St. Louis County earlier today and drove past Ambiente’s former location in a reasonably new strip center. The tenant in their old space is Dirt Cheap — the beer & cigarette’s place. I love it, we get designer furniture and they get cheap smokes!

Maybe on my next visit way out there I’ll see some pawn shops or check cashing places?

– Steve

St. Louis Likes to Raze Buildings on October 20th

One year ago today developers building the unnecessary parking garage in the Old Post Office District began demolishing the Century Building while a judge was considering a temporary restraining order against demolition. Clearly they wanted to damage the building before a TRO was issued. Ultimately the TRO was not issued. It was a very sad day.

Heard on discussion forums on Wednesday evening, 10/20/2004:

The next day:

I drove downtown at 10:30pm Wednesday night to take a peek at progress, St. Louis style. The southeast corner of the Century’s top floor certainly had Geisman’s signature on it, but the wrecking ball was idle – at least for the half hour I was there. I asked a construction worker what was going on and he said they were just taking a break at that moment, had been delayed while adding another section to the crane, planned on continuing the demo all night long and that it would take about 4 months to complete the job. I wonder if all-nighters, such as this are budgeted for the entire 4 month term or limited to only the wee hours of evenings preceding a judge’s ruling on a petition for a TRO. Does the side opposing the motion for a TRO in this case, gain leverage by rendering the building beyond redemption? Geez, given the issues being heard by a judge concurrently, ! wouldn’t such a blatant and vitriolic action be considered Contempt of Court?

From another on 10/21/2004:

The mood for many in the city was low. In time the “establishment” will realize the error of razing the Century Building.

Fast forward to present…

Last night the St. Louis Cardinals lost to the Houston Astros, ending their 2005 season. Demolition will now begin on the old Busch Stadium. Originally they had planned to implode the 40 year old structure but they will instead use more conventional demolition techniques.

When they were discussing imploding the stadium I began a post I was going to title, “Top Ten Buildings I’d Implode Before Busch Stadium.” I didn’t want my work to go to waste so here is the list:

While I like the arches of the “old” stadium I can live without the rest of it. The building to sidewalk relationship is dismal. The new stadium shows more promise from an urban perspective although the whole red brick retro thing is a predictable.

– Steve

PS @ 10:45am: It was 11 days later, on October 31, 2004, that I started Urban Review – St. Louis.

The Failure of St. Louis’ Gateway Mall

For those that don’t know, the Gateway Mall is not a failed downtown shopping mall. That would be St. Louis Centre. The Gateway Mall is a failed grand outdoor space running from the Arch on the East to Union Station on the West.

Originally envisioned decades ago as a grand green space along the lines of The National Mall in Washington D.C., it has consistently failed to live up to expectations. The reasons for failure are numerous and complicated. As decade after decade past the reason for failure changed.

Keep in mind that clearance for what would become the Arch grounds didn’t commence in earnest until the early 1940s. Yet, in the decades prior to WWII plans were under way to begin creating a grand boulevard in downtown St. Louis. Early plans focused on Market Street from Tucker (then 12th) West to Grand. Yes, plans show concepts clearing a path all the way from 12th to Grand! Thankfully they only found money to raze 10 blocks from 12th to 22nd.

So first came the vacant blocks along the North side of Market Street West of 12th. Then one by one blocks between the Civil Courts building and the Old Courthouse were razed. During the same period the adjacent blocks were also raised for banal buildings and parking garages. One-way streets and other mistakes drove the life out of downtown.

[Gateway Mall in the 1980s. Gateway One office building and the Morton May amphitheater are not yet constructed. Area is dominated by wide streets, surface parking and lifeless parking garages. Photo courtesy of Robin Ringwald]

Gateway One, the 1980s office building that was built on the site of old buildings and in the middle of the greenway has received much deserved criticism. It wasn’t until I was reading through many newspaper columns and proposals did I fully understand what happened and why. The politics was ugly. One property owner had the best plan to restore most of his buildings but the call for open space was overwhelming. He lost, confirming the St. Louis tradition for razing buildings on the National Register of Historic Places. I never thought I’d say this but Gateway One is far better than some proposals on the drawing boards.

At the time the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects did not support the plan that would have preserved the historic buildings. Instead, they supported a plan calling for new buildings along the North half of about 4-5 blocks. The South half of these blocks were to be a walkway. While I would have preferred keeping the historic and no so historic buildings the plan supported by the AIA was not bad. It had the openness and views sought by many while having street level retail in the bases of the new buildings. While people didn’t think so at the time, this plan would have resulted in more pedestrian activity than what we ended up with.

Each generation over the years has developed a new plan to stimulate the area. All sorts of ideas have been suggested including ice staking, world-class museums, fountains and special paving patterns. Each and every time these schemes have failed to understand one important ingredient…

People.

If marketed correctly I could hold a successful event on the ruins of the former Pruitt-Igoe housing complex but that doesn’t mean it will remain active after the event. Same is true downtown. Events draw people for the event. Assuming people will return to a location after the event is the downfall of many schemes to revitalize areas. Pretty plans with decorative paving stones and retro lanterns will continue to fail.

Downtown St. Louis has too much open space.

Decades of razing buildings for surface parking and gratuitous green space has left too little urban activity. The current ratio of active buildings to open space is too low to sustain a lively downtown during non-event times. Washington Avenue is thriving partially because it feels like an urban street should feel.

Successful urban open space has lively edges. That is, the surrounding buildings are a haven of activity with lots of people coming and going at all hours. The best way to achieve this constant level of activity is street-level retail. But take a good look at what surrounds the Gateway Mall — parking garages, low activity office towers, and other buildings not adding to the area. Jurors in the middle of the area must leave to find food and beverage. The City Hall entrance facing Market is closed. The Kiel center remains closed.

The most recent of many plans is the Downtown Now! action plan from 1999. I think it correctly determines the problems the area faces but only offers window dressing for solutions. In some cases I think this plan would worsen things by turning Market Street into one-way Westbound. Thankfully they never found funds to make they recommended changes. To read the Downtown Now! 1.8mb PDF file on the Gateway Mall click here. More information on The Gateway Mall can be found on the St. Louis Parks Department website.

I’ve got some specific thoughts on the area but I’m going to save those for this weekend when the AIA is holding a design charrette to examine the area. The public is invited to participate in one of two ways. First, by serving on a design team for $10. Second is to view the results at a free Sunday afternoon open house. More information including the program and registration forms at AIA St. Louis.

This is your chance to participate in the process — don’t let it slip by.

– Steve

Downtown Now! Looking A Bit Dated

Today my research took me to the Downtown Now! website. I’ve been there numerous times but this time I approached it with a more critical eye. Here is their welcome message:

So who are the public and private representatives that make up this organization? When you go to the “partners” page you get the list. Don’t look for any active residents or local small business owners. This is a top-down big business & government group — the least likely to actually revitalize downtown.

First we’ve got representatives from other civic boosting groups; Regional Commerce and Growth Association (RCGA), St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission (SLCVC), Downtown St. Louis Partnership and St. Louis 2004. I would have linked to St. Louis 2004 but it seems their website is no longer up and running. Businesses are Bank of America, SBC and the former May Company. The rest is comprised of elected or appointed officials from the City of St. Louis.

Prominent on their main page is a logo for Celebrate 2004 along with the text “What’s Happening in 2004?” Uh, last time I check it is October of 2005 and rapidly approaching 2006. Clicking on the link just gives me an access denied message. That isn’t going to do a good job revitalizing downtown.

But really the group is charged with developing an action plan:

So eight years have passed since Downtown Now! was created. But the Secretary of State’s website indicates the organization was created on November 1st of 1999, not 1997. Okay, so in a couple of weeks six years will have passed for this “five-to-seven year” mission. Are they in wrap-up mode? It doesn’t appear so. The organization is a “perpetual” non-profit per the state.

The “action plan” was adopted by the city in December of 1999 and thankfully much has happened since then. These last six years have been quite exciting to watch. Say you are a developer from another city and you hear about all the good things happening in St. Louis. You find Downtown Now!’s website and look through the action plan. As a six year old document you look for something more current. Then you see the “progress map” to show what has been done and what is under construction. This is certainly a great way to communicate where we are in completing the overall plan. One problem. The progress map hasn’t been updated since May 2001 — well over four years ago! Certainly downtown has progressed in the last four and a half years. Shouldn’t the revitalization organization communicate this progress?

The question that comes to mind for me is how many public-private non-profits do we need operating downtown? Consider this from the Downtown St. Louis Partnership website:

The Downtown St. Louis Partnership is a not-for-profit organization representing its members in pursuit of a healthy and vital downtown area. In that role, it also serves as the manager of the Community Improvement District that provides funding to implement services that make downtown clean, safe and inviting.

And before anyone says that the Downtown St. Louis Partnership is not a public-private organization just remember that the City of St. Louis, a public government, is a member.

A non-profit working to improve downtown is a good idea but I personally think it would be more effective coming from a more grass roots level. We certainly don’t need both the Downtown Now! and the Downtown St. Louis Partnership.

– Steve