Sign the Wall to Let the City & BJC Know We Want to Keep Forest Park Intact

It looks like many groups are organizing in opposition to the city’s deal to lease part of Forest Park to BJC, allowing for construction above ground. One group is planning a demonstration each weekend:

PRESS RELEASE

‘The Signing Wall’ will be here every week-end for people to come and sign, until a final decision is made by the Protectors of Forest Park and the Mayor, Darlene Green and Jim Shrewsbury.

We hope the number of participants will grow, as more people gather, who are opposed to any loss of Forest Park. We hope you will come and sign ‘The Wall’.

Across from Barnes Hospital, above the underground garage. 3:00pm til 6:00pm

The silent protest; with yard signs, letters to the Editor, blog comments, websites and news articles by the media have done a great job exposing the proposal..

It is time to be seen and heard.

Vocal demonstration at 5:00pm

‘The Wall’ is a gathering place to conjoin resources and energy. To unite enmasse, on common ground.

There will be a vocal demonstration at 5:00pm; all are invited to join in.

We hope, publicity will be the key the opposition needs, to trash this proposal and agree, collectively,

Forest Park will be Forever, Always.

Never an amputation.

Sincerely,

The Neighbors of BJC

Indeed it is Mayor Slay, Comptroller Darlene Green and Board President Jim Shrewsbury that will make the final decision. To date both Green and Shrewsbury have been vocal in their questioning the deal while not outright rejecting the concept. If you haven’t told each of them yet how you feel, now is the time to act. Below are links to their email forms as well as their office phone numbers.

Mayor Slay, (314) 622-3201
Comptroller Darlene Green, (314) 622-4389
President Jim Shrewsbury, (314) 622-3287

It wouldn’t hurt to contact the folks over at Forest Park Forever to let them know you want to keep the park intact as well.

Another group out there is the Citizens to Protect Forest Park. You’ve probably seen their green & white yard signs saying in bold letters, “Our park is NOT for sale.” Their website is protectforestpark.org. Another website on the topic is CWE Greenspace.

We do have an issue with how to fund the on-going maintenance of Forest Park. The last thing we want to do is have gone through 10+ years of work and planning and millions of dollars just to see it deteriorate in the same amount of time. The solution is not a secret deal to lease well-used park land for construction, at least not until alternatives have been publicly discussed and ruled out. Leasing this land to BJC should be a last resort measure, not a first step.

– Steve

Penrose Park House Saved….Maybe?

Last night the Preservation Board told the city’s Board of Public Service they could not raze a house on the corner of the Penrose Park. That is not exactly true, they cannot deny a permit but can only recommend. The Board of Public Service may well go ahead and raze the structure.

From the Cultural Resources report:

The building is an Arts and Crafts red brick structure constructed by a private owner in 1902. It was acquired by City ordinance in 1905 when the City created Penrose Park and was used as a Park Keeper’s House until the late 1980’s when it was abandoned as a residential use and boarded by the City.

Yes, eminent domain was alive and well in 1905 when the city took a man’s 3-year old home away from him. Park Keeper’s houses really don’t work today given how park maintenance is handled. However, these structures are making a comeback as local community offices, arts centers and other uses convenient to a park.

Granted, the city does not have the funds to renovate the structure. I suggested last night they use the demolition funds to mothball the building until a use can be found. This beautifully proportioned house could be a major asset to Penrose Park in the future.

The city is in the process of realigning Kingshighway on the edge of the park and moving a smaller park road to the east of this house. Neither road is blocked if the house remains. The only issue is a natural amphitheater that is planned for the site. The Board of Public Service presented no details on the exact size of the proposed earthen amphitheater nor why it could not be located adjacent to the house.

A Friends of Penrose Park needs to be formed to help secure the structure and find a new use. This may well bring new life, energy and pride to this park. I can also see the cyclists that use the recently repaved velodrome in the park helping with the effort, perhaps as a meeting place for their functions? This building is worth saving for our future generations.

For more info see the Preservation Board agenda. Also, read Michael Allen’s excellent essay on this building.

– Steve

Forest Park Forever Seeks to Alter Government Hill…Forever

You may not know the name Government Hill but you know the view, look up toward the World’s Fair Pavilion. Classical cascading terraces and a couple of fountains. It has been a favorite St. Louis backdrop picture for decades. Forest Park Forever, wants to “obliterate” the existing landscape design and do something “fresh.” Last night they sought approval from the Preservation Board.

The Preservation Board’s role in the parks is strictly that as an advisor, they do not have any veto power over projects. The board seemed to like the new design but not in place of the old design. Kate Shea, director of Cultural Resources, read from the Forest Park Master Plan about intentions around repair and restoration and grand park facilities. Indeed, much of the park has been restored and maybe embellished. Areas like the grand basin were not recreated into something entirely different from the original. The Preservation Board deferred a decision and asked Forest Park Forever to reconsider.

In testimony it was discovered the costs of restoring the classical features would be roughly the same as the new proposal. Part of the issue is making the hill accessible (aka ADA ramps). Forest Park Forever has a plan for adding ADA accessible ramps on the outer edges of the existing classical layout but they seem too smitten by their new zig-zag scheme.

For pictures of the existing and proposed look through the Preservation Board agenda on this item.

I testified briefly to raise functional concerns. I’ve attended events at the World’s Fair Pavilion where the first terrace down the hill was used in conjunction with events in the Pavilion. The new scheme places terraces much further down the hill. I also said that whatever plan was built, the materials need to last 90 years, the length of the proposed new BJC lease of part of Forest Park in exchange for a maintenance trust fund.

The next step in the process is a Forest Park Advisory Committee meeting on July 20, 2006.

– Steve

Negligent Board Giving Away Charless Home

Despite the spin in the Post-Dispatch back in April the Charless Home, founded in 1853, is not “merging” with or being “acquired” by Bethesda Health Group. The folks I talked to tell me Charless’ Board is essentially paying Bethesda to take the south side landmark. The Charless Home has prime real estate at I-55 and South Broadway (map) yet the board has voted to give the real estate and millions of dollars to Bethesda in exchange for… well, nothing.

The board, comprised mainly of Clayton & Ladue socialites, is making a huge mistake. I’m told the Charless Home has nearly $17 million in the bank, hardly a distressed non-profit. A few board members voted against giving Charless to Bethesda and instead suggested they take on medicaid patients and consider constructing independent living housing on their grounds.

The one-sided article in the Post-Dispatch says staff didn’t want medicaid patients due to the paperwork. Wrong. The issue is the country club board didn’t want to spend any money upgrading the facility, instead finding it easier to give away the 153-year old institution. The grounds, just two blocks from my house, are spectacular. The setting is ideal for constructing new independent living apartments facing Osceola St. &/or Nebraska Ave.

Bethesda is talking about ensuring the facility remains open for at least three more years but I can’t see families entrusting their loved ones here with the possibility of future closure. Also, I’ve heard talk of Bethesda building some new building in St. Louis County and calling it “Charless at Bethesda” or a similarly offensive name.

Back to the location. I have fears a deal is already in the works to sell the property and raze all the structures and mature trees. I suspect city and Ald. Ortman (9th Ward) will use the “we need retail & sales tax” argument to go along with the demolitions. The property, originally 8 acres, was reduced to just over 1.6 acres over the years as the adjacent neighborhood developed. Still, I can see a big box developer eyeing the property’s easy highway access and visibility and try to get a couple of more adjacent blocks razed for a big development.

And before I hear the now tired “it is not in your ward” argument let me state that the other three corners of my intersection are the 9th Ward. So while I am in the 25th Ward I look at the 9th Ward daily. Furthermore, a potential buyout of homes and demolition to create a large site could end up directly across the street from me.

While this board is off playing golf with their country club buddies from Bethesda it will be those of us in the city left to deal with the consequences of their actions. If they didn’t want to take the responsibility to see the 153+ year old facility continue they should have resigned from the board so that community leaders with vision for the future of the city could take their place.

At the very least I would like some assurances the property is not leveled. The building and setting are spectacular and has great reuse potential. Our city continues to face critical urban development decisions but the decision makers are woefully inadequate.

– Steve

McGuire on Forest Park/BJC “Deal”

Former Alderman and Director of Parks Dan McGuire has been making the rounds of public meetings letting his thoughts be known on the subject of BJC getting a long-term lease on 12 acres of Forest Park that, due to a road construction project, appear to be “isolated.” Given that most of our city’s 105 city parks (see list) are under 5 acres I just don’t see how you can call 12 isolated but then again the mayor’s office likes to twist things in odd ways.

I first heard Dan McGuire speak on this issue at the May 3, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, a great presentation by the way. He recently updated his comments which you can read here. It is a 5-page PDF document that explains in great detail his background as both the alderman for the area as well as the director of parks.

Last week he sent letters to the small committee looking into the deal. From the letter:

Much has been made of the assertion that this amended lease would provide a “dedicated source” of
revenue for the day-to-day operations and maintenance of Forest Park by combining new revenues from
BJH and matching annual donations from Forest Park Forever (FPF). While, once again, this is a noble
this catchy phrase doesn’t really capture the totality of the deal and, perhaps, simply serves as a
smokescreen.

In this letter he does again into detail talking about the financing and how the plan was to ensure the city maintained funding to Forest Park. He also notes how Forest Park Forever has been working since at least 2001 to create a maintenance endowment for Forest Park so it is not like a new source of funding has suddenly been found. Click here to read the four page letter to the special committee.

And finally McGuire is offering amendments to the city budget to correct the diversion of funds away from Forest Park. Click here to read his presentation to the Ways & Means committee.

BJC apparently approached the city last year to make this happen. Had BJC not approached the city how would the mayor’s office be dealing with maintaining Forest Park?

Even though this deal has been in talks for a while do our leaders have a backup plan just in case?

Until 2001/2002 all of Forest Park had been in one ward but for some reason this section was taken away from the 28th Ward and placed in the 17th Ward during this last round of redistricting. Coincidence or careful long-range planning?

What is the rush? BJC says they don’t have any immediate plans for the site (I’m not convinced) and we’ve not figured out where to relocate all the facilities. Is it too much to ask for our leaders to have their ducks in a row before coming to us with these plans?

In the meantime, it is a hot holiday weekend so get out enjoy some of the city’s great parks.

– Steve