Taxis Still Blocking Pedestrian Sidewalk at St. Louis’ Convention Center

This past January I had a post about the taxi situation in front of America’s Center, St. Louis’ convention center. Two things were happening. The main issue was the St. Louis Taxi Commission (which covers St. Louis City & County) set up a taxi stand in the direct path of pedestrians walking along Washington Ave. The second thing, as a result taxis were exiting the stand via the pedestrian crossing at 8th Street.

Above is a good overall view looking east along Washington Avenue with the convention center entrance on the left and the convention hotel on the right, across the street. In the direct line of pedestrians walking along Washington are various planters, bollards, and a taxi. In the next block is access to a light rail station. Pedestrians are forced to either share the space with the taxis or walk in the driveway off to the left. Either way pedestrians are placed in the direct path of cars or buses. You’d think, in the interest of getting more activity downtown, we’d try to make the sidewalks as friendly as possible.

The image above showed the pedestrian crossing at 8th street. Taxis leaving their designated stand would make a quick left through the ramp/crossing area to get onto Washington, go down 8th or head over to the hotel. For video of this in action see my prior post.

As of yesterday two additional bollards had been placed to help prevent the taxis from leaving the stand through the pedestrian crossing. The other bollards shown were already in place back in January. While I am glad these were added it does not address the fact the sidewalk along one of our more important roads is being consumed by auto uses. This is all next to a wide road (4 lanes plus center).

What does this image say about the priorities of St. Louis’ leaders?

In January I suggested the taxi stand be moved to the outside lane of Washington Ave. Here is what I wrote:

Set up the taxi stand on Washington Ave between 7th and 8th, moving the existing bus stop to the West of 8th but still in front of the convention center. Also allow parking on the opposite side of Washington next to the Renaissance Grand Hotel. A few spaces could be short-term spaces (15-30 minutes) for those running into Starbucks or Kinkos). The rest would serve the general area. At the end of that block An American Place restaurant could have 60ft or so for valet. Back at 7th and Washington I’d set up a single short-term space immediately adjacet to the visitor’s center.

Traffic, in my view, just isn’t that heavy to justify all the open lanes. Sure, we’ve got that 15 minute period in the morning and afternoon where traffic backs up for a block — maybe a block and a half. This section of Washington prohibits parking 24/7 while just up the street between 10th and Tucker (aka 12th) parking is allowed except for 7am-9am and 4pm-6pm. We simply do not have massive two hour rush periods on Washington Ave.

The solution is this, allow parking on Washington Ave. with a couple of exceptions. On the westbound lane (north side of street) prohibit morning parking from say 7:30am to 8:30am. This keeps the two westbound lanes open in the AM when it is needed most. Conversely, allow parking on the eastbound lane (south side of street) prohibit afternoon parking from 4:30pm to 5:30pm. The same logic applies, afternoon traffic is predominently eastbound in the afternoon so keep the parking lane open for an hour. There is absolutely no logic in prohibiting parking in both directions both in the morning and afternoon.

We want those who work downtown but don’t live downtown to stick around after they leave the office. They should want to stay to walk around, have a drink, grab dinner and do some shopping. Instead of providing a pleasant place for this to happen we have Washington Ave configured as a thoroughfare to make vacating the city easy. Where the lead taxi is shown above should be a vendor cart selling hot dogs, soft drinks and bottled water (so long as the cart doesn’t block the sidewalk). This would leave a far better impression on visitors/workers than a couple of taxis sitting on the sidewalk.

St. Louis’ leaders need to wake up and realize they can give away millions in TIFs but if we don’t attend to the details of people where it matters most we will not have the type of downtown we seek.

Biondi Razes Public Housing Building for Open Space

Don’t get excited folks, this is old news. Actually, it is more than 15 years old.  I was doing some research on the St. Louis Housing Authority and came across an interesting story that given the recent news about expansion of the law school I thought I’d share.
From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch March 15, 1992:

On Thursday, the Cochran Tenant Management Corporation, which [Bertha] Gilkey heads, submitted to the St. Louis Housing Authority a plan to buy one of its buildings that St. Louis University had wanted. The plan does not list a purchase price. Gilkey says she wants to turn University House into a cultural center as part of an education and training program she wants to offer to dysfunctional families at Cochran. University House, at 215 North Spring Avenue, is about three miles from Cochran, a public housing complex just north of downtown. Other parts of the program would operate out of a privately owned apartment complex near Cochran that Gilkey is negotiating to buy. Sources who did not want to be identified believe that Gilkey could be using her right under federal law to buy University House as a bargaining chip with St. Louis University to get its help with her family program. The university could be instrumental in starting an alternative education program for children in public housing, Gilkey said.

At the time Gilkey was trying to purchase the then vacant Neighborhood Gardens apartment complex adjacent to Cochran Gardens, the “privately owned” complex mentioned above. Neighorhood Gardens, architecturally very interesting, was recently renovated. Given how that vacant complex was next to Cochran Gardens it made sense to work togther but I am not so sure her plans for the building on Spring at Laclede would have been logistically feasible. For now I will assume that it would work and that transportation would not be an issue.

From Jerry Berger’s Post-Dispatch column in June 1992, just months after the building dispute started with Gilkey competing with Biondi:

Biondi wants to extend the malls on the Frost Campus by closing off West Pine Boulevard between Vandeventer and Spring and closing off Spring Avenue between Lindell and Laclede. He also envisions an outdoor amphitheater and a significant monument consisting of a bell tower and fountain at the intersection of West Pine and Spring. Removing asphalt on Grand Boulevard to allow the construction of a sculpture park. The university is quietly seeking a 6- to 10-foot sculpture as the park’s anchor. (Are you listening, Laumeier Sculpture Park’s Beej Nierengarten-Smith?) Sources close to Biondi say he is hoping alumni and benefactors of the university will dig deep into their pockets to finance the projects.

Does that say “removing asphalt on Grand Boulevard” for a sculpture park? Yes, yes it does. I can’t even think about that one right now. The main point of the above quote is that Biondi wanted to close off both West Pine and Spring and without control of the University House at the coner of these two streets he’d be out of luck, most likely. Gilkey’s plan, if you recall, would require transporting some people back and forth from the Cochran complex. Closed streets would certainly make transporting individuals more complex.

With no agreement between Biondi and Gilkey, a lawsuit was filed to help SLU & Biondi. From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch October 1, 1992:

St. Louis and its housing authority filed suit Wednesday to block a tenant management group from getting a 13-story building the city wants to sell to St. Louis University. The suit seeks to force the Department of Housing and Urban Development to sell the vacant University House, 215 North Spring Avenue, to the university. The suit was filed in federal court. On Monday, HUD tentatively approved selling University House to the Cochran Tenant Management Corp., headed by Bertha Gilkey. That organization runs Cochran Gardens housing complex north of downtown.

Mayor Vincent C. Schoemehl Jr. accused HUD secretary Jack Kemp of making a ”political payoff” to Gilkey, whom Kemp frequently refers to as a model public housing manager. ”This is an irresponsible use of power on the part of Jack Kemp and his millions of minions,” Schoemehl said. The Rev. Lawrence J. Biondi, president of St. Louis University, said he was ”completely frustrated and outraged” by HUD’s decision to prefer Gilkey’s bid. ”We will be left with an abandoned and decaying building in the heart of our campus and our community outreach programs will not all be housed in one convenient location,” Biondi said. Joseph G. Schiff, an assistant HUD secretary in Washington, responded: ”If Vince Schoemehl would spend more time improving the St. Louis Housing Authority and less time on needless partisan bickering and ridiculous lawsuits, the taxpayers of America would be better served.” …St. Louis University has been trying to get the 19-year-old building since the Housing Authority closed it in 1987. Gilkey has proposed a cultural and education center for families in public housing. The building once housed elderly people.

So in October 1992 SLU President Biondi wants to ensure their community outreach programs will all be in one location. The next day the Post-Dispatch reported that, “The university wants the building for offices and community programs.”  Well, that sounds good but in reality Biondi likely figured that if Gilkey got her cultural and education center it would mess up his plans.

Gee, was anything else going on in October 1992? Say, a presidential re-election campaign for Bush Sr. against some Governor of Arkansas? Could Kemp have been trying to help Bush get the black vote in St. Louis by siding with Gilkey? As we all know, Clinton made Bush a one-term President which meant Jack Kemp was out as HUD Secretary.
Besides the Presidential election of 1992 the mayor would elect its first African-American Mayor, Freeman Bosley, Jr., in March 1993. Geez, a new HUD Secretary under Clinton and a new mayor, would this help Gilkey? Nope! From the July 21, 1993 Post-Dispatch:

Bertha Gilkey, who failed in her bid to buy the 13-story, vacant University House, said Tuesday that she would sue the St. Louis Housing Authority and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in federal court to reverse the transfer of the building to the university.

Well, we could see that coming. I’m not sure if she sued or not but SLU got the building.  Back to the July 21, 1993 article:

The building, with 201 apartments that had been for elderly public housing residents, is on the west side of Spring Avenue just south of Lindell Boulevard. The university is turning that block, the block to the south of it and Pine Street between Spring and Vandeventer Avenue into a pedestrian mall. Victor De La Cruz, executive director of the St. Louis Housing Authority, said Tuesday that the agency had complied with federal procedures in the matter. “Our position does not change,” he said. The transfer was completed Friday, said the Rev. Lawrence Biondi, university president. He said he did not expect Gilkey’s plans to delay the mall’s completion. He said the university would raze the dilapidated building in four to six weeks.

What!?! Raze the building? Back in October SLU President Fr. Biondi wanted to ensure all their community outreach programs would be in a single convenient location! I guess Biondi conveniently found another location for the programs once the University House building was transferred to him — I mean to SLU.

The July 21, 1993 article continues on Biondi’s plans:

The university started working on the mall in May, closing Spring Avenue between Laclede Avenue and Lindell. The area will be transformed into a “contemplative park” that will include a lighted walking space, a 50-foot clock tower, a 10-tier amphitheater with waterfall, a fountain and sculptures. Biondi said that eventually, the university would complete its plan to define the school’s boundaries by closing West Pine Boulevard at Vandeventer Avenue.

A “contemplative park?”  Oh please, with all those ‘neked’ bronze statues around campus who can contemplate anything the Jesuits would approve.  Biondi got his street closings, clock tower, waterfall & fountain in addition to the sculptures.   I was not and am not a fan of the street closings but I get the “campus” logic.  What I don’t get is the razing of a building only 20 years old, most likely with a fine structure.
The Post-Dispatch has an editorial supporting SLU in the August 2, 19993 edition:

The St. Louis Housing Authority has given St. Louis University control of University House, a vacant public housing building on Spring Avenue near Lindell Boulevard. The university intends to demolish the structure and turn the block into a pedestrian mall. It might seem unconscionable to raze the building when this community has a waiting list of people needing decent housing. But the transfer can be justified in that it offers long-term benefits to public housing tenants.

As part of the transfer, the university promises to set up an $840,000 endowment for scholarships to be awarded over the next century to students who live in public housing. It also promises to help public housing managers develop and expand their business skills, and it will encourage public housing residents to make use of counseling and education clinics offered by the university. Though this transfer holds promise, it shouldn’t be regarded as a precedent.

There certainly should be concern over the fact that public housing is being demolished without being replaced.  Ordinarily, the federal government would require the construction of an equal number of public housing units to replace the 201 that will be lost when the 13-story University House is demolished. However, the federal government made an exception in this case. 

I intend to find out the current status of these scholorships and the rest of SLU’s promises.

The 201 units of public housing lost when the building was razed in 1993 is a bit dramatic, they were really lost six years earlier in 1987 when the St. Louis Housing Authority shuttered the building.  But that takes me back to one sentence from the Post-Dispatch from October 1, 1992; “St. Louis University has been trying to get the 19-year-old building since the Housing Authority closed it in 1987.”  What are the chances that Biondi helped make sure the housing authority, with members appointed by Mayor Schoemehl, decide the fate of the then 14-year old building housing elderly residents?  I think closing the University House was part of a long-term plan for Biondi.  When did he become President?  Oh yes, 1987 — the same year the Housing Authority closed the University House public housing building.  Schoemehl is now the head of Grand Center, Inc. which works closely with Fr. Biondi.

Returning to 2007 we have the current issue of SLU razing an old mansion for the law school expansion (see my post).  Architect Paul Hohmann has done some more research this latest issue, for his report see Vanishing STL.

KWMU Reports on Land Assembly Tax Credit and the ‘Blairmont’ Scheme

Most of you have heard the deal by now, a huge tax credit for developers doing projects of 75 acres or more in North St. Louis.  That is the plan passed by the Missouri legislature and awaiting Governor Blunt’s signature.  But 75 acres is just massive.  For comparison sake, the old Pruitt-Igoe housing site was only 57 acres (source). From KWMU:

Missouri’s historic tax credit program has done wonders for the city of St. Louis. It allowed big developers to turn old downtown warehouses into lofts. It’s also helped individual rehabbers fix up houses that have seen better days.

But a new tax credit plan that Missouri lawmakers sent to Governor Matt Blunt this spring gives developers major incentives to buy up large tracts of city land.

Someone is already doing that on the near north side, and many people there are worried about the future of their homes.

Click here for the story and link to the MP3 audio report from KWMU’s Matt Sepic.  Sepic indicates that he had scheduled to interview developer Paul McKee but that McKee canceled.  Nice huh?

I’m personally not opposed to a tax break for developers on some larger projects.  I have issues with the minimum size.  Yes, a single home lot at a time will take longer than we have to revitalize the north side.  But 75 acres at a minimum?  St. Louis is blessed with a very nice street grid of very reasonable sized blocks.  Why not have the minimum be more along the lines of 4-6 city blocks, still a decent sized project.  Why is it we must always go for the gigantic silver bullet solution in this town?

Jane Jacobs calls this “cataclysmic money.”  From Chapter 16 of the Death and Life of Great American Cities:

Money has its limitations.  It cannot buy inherent success for cities where the conditions for inherent success are lacking and where the use of the money fails to supply them.  Furthermore, money can only do ultimate harm where it destroys the conditions needed for inherent success.  On the other hand, by helping to supply the requirements needed, money can help build inherent success in cities.  Indeed, it is indispensible.

So far the state has not required anything that will ensure these 75+ acre projects have any qualities for success.  The city, with its 1947 suburban zoning code, will almost ensure failure without massive variances.  Developer McKee and Mayor Slay are remaining quite on their intentions and unfortunately will likely try to avoid public or professional input into the overall plan.  My fear is the end result will be a huge “investment” but a long-term failure.  At this point I have no edvidence to suggest otherwise.

Lowe’s & Schnuck’s Customer Using Mobility Scooter Forced to Use Street; Center Lacks ADA Access

I’ve been harping for nearly a year now about the lack of ADA access for customers of the city’s newest big box shopping center, Loughborough Commons.  Despite $14 million in tax incentives, not all are able to easily access the two stores that opened last year, Schnuck’s and Lowe’s.

Yesterday I spotted a person leaving Loughborough Commons by the secondary entrance along Grand.  He had made purchases as I could see shopping bags in the front and back of his mobility scooter.  The center has only two ways in —- one on Loughborough and this one off Grand.  An ADA compliant route from either public street (and to either store) has not been provided.

Above this customer is using the wide auto drive which is also used by delivery trucks.

The customer then heads northbound on the public street.  Loughborough Commons developer DESCO did not provide a public sidewalk along Grand despite a wide public right of way.  This puts people most vulnerable at risk.  Alderman Villa, when approving this project, could have likely required a public sidewalk within the public right of way.

I was expecting the customer on his mobility scooter to turn on one of the many streets that Loughborough Commons turns it back to.  Instead, he continued north on Grand toward Loughborouh.  You might ask, why didn’t he make it over to the sidewalk on the left (west) side of the street?  Well, it is not ADA compliant as not all corners have ramps.  A sidewalk along the east side of Grand would have added very little to the overall budget of the project which again received $14 million in public tax breaks.

The customer turned left onto Loughorough Ave, a very busy street!  Above you can see him just ahead of the westbound red pickup.  Due to the high volume of traffic I was unable to get across the street to get better photos as the man on the scooter approached the rear of a parked van.  It was nerve racking watching him pass this parked vehicle on such a busy road.

The man then continued on westbound Loughborough and turned right into Carondelet Park (look closely and you can see  him at the entrance).  You may look at this image and wonder why he is not on the sidewalk shown at right.  That would be a good question.  Remember, sidewalks in St. Louis are only for show — not for actual users.  This man had no way, from Grand, to get onto this sidewalk which would have put him out of harms way on a very busy street.

The man entered the park, most likely cutting through to get home. He continued on this road for a bit until he caught up with the internal path system where he continued west-northwest.  The nice sidewalk seen in the last picture does not continue into the park.

How is it that a new from scratch $40+ million project with $14 million of that in public tax subsidies can fail to accommodate real users?  Answer, lack of priority.  Ald. Villa will remind us that the center is not finished even though the two stores opened last year.  The large site has only two entrances and, given the grades of the main entrance, neither will meet the federal ADA requirements even when finished per their plans submitted to the city.

Yes, the new grocery store is cleaner than the old one and hey we are getting a Breadco (Panera to folks outside St. Louis) and a Starbucks soon.  Do these things make up for the fact we’ve failed to ensure that people such as this man can travel safely to the store?  I don’t think so.

I hope nothing happens to this man or anyone else traveling by foot, wheelchair or mobility scooter and headed to Loughborough Commons.  But, I’m putting the City of St. Louis, DESCO, Schnuck’s and Lowe’s (and soon Panera, Starbucks, etc…) on notice that Loughborough Commons fails to meet the needs of the community and to meet the requirements set forth by federal civil rights legislation, the Americans with Disabilities Act.  If some unfortunate accident happens, I will help to make sure you are all held liable.

Saint Louis University (SLU) to Raze Historic Building to Construct Fake Historic Building

Saint Louis University has announced plans to renovate and expand the law school building.

Saint Louis University President Lawrence Biondi, S.J., has announced that a fundraising initiative to expand and renovate the School of Law is beginning. The initiative will fund the construction of a new classroom building and large-scale renovation of the current facilities. The University’s Board of Trustees gave its approval to start fundraising for the project at its May meeting.

How much fundraising? How about $35 million? I can see why SLU needed $8 million in public tax incentives to build their new arena, it would make fundraising just that much harder. The only other thing standing in the way are two old buildings along Lindell Blvd.

Demolition of this older building with a newer facade (1940s?) is being razed despite being a viable structure. I guess it is part of the Jesuit tradition to be wasteful with resources?

This former mansion will also meet the wrecking ball. This part of St. Louis once had many fine homes but over the years they’ve pretty much all been razed. This one had been used by the university for some years.

This beautiful home will not be razed, just surrounded by the new building. Here in St. Louis we have a long standing tradition of saving only the best structures (aka Landmarks) and destroying every bit of context around it. The home in the background and shown in the prior picture, on most streets, would be one of the finest buildings and considered safe from demolition. Sitting next door to this more elaborate home, it is considered disposible.

This is a really long block and the separate buildings help create a nice rhythm. The new building will destroy this wonderful rhythm of structures. It will also attempt to give a false sense of history by the use of gothic architecture:

The project will completely reconfigure the appearance and functioning of the current law school facility. Special features will include a new state-of-the-art classroom building, a stately courtroom, a grand commons, a modernized legal information center and an exterior facade in the classic Gothic style.

Below is SLU’s artist rendering of the final results.

Some may look at the above sketch and think it is an improvement over the current law school, below:

I’d be hard pressed to convincingly argue this beige box is architecturally better than the thin veneer of gothic that will be applied to it like wall paint from Bella & Birch. In 2007 are these our only architectural choices? I’m guessing someone did a study showing that universities like SLU and nearby Washington University can east-coast old school tuition if the campus buildings look like old school east-coast campuses.

The stunning old historic mansion will be surrounded by nothing but pretent gothic. Classic…