Home » Planning & Design » Recent Articles:

ULI Competition Finalists Selected, Posted Online

ULI has announced the finalists in their national competition. Here is a look at each of the four final teams:

Columbia

Jury Summary:
Team 2105’s proposal introduces a skywalk system that connects Saint Louis University’s Frost campus with its health sciences center. The skywalk allows pedestrians to move from one end of the university campus to the other without interfering with vehicular and freight traffic, and draws student activities into the project area, where they can be shared by the academic and medical communities. At the landscape level, environmental strategies create open and green spaces, and site edges blend discreetly into the surrounding community.

I had to check my calendar after seeing this project, making sure it was not 1960. I also had recollections of the tragic I.M. Pei plan to “modernize” my hometown of Oklahoma City — razing old buildings, creating large “super blocks” and putting pedestrians in underground tunnels or in tubes over the sidewalks. In short, everything a city is not.

If pedestrians cannot walk along the street then change the conditions of the street. Safety must be a concern and removing people from the watchful eye of others is just foolish. The SLU campus already creates a situation where outsiders are not welcomed, we don’t need to create more of that. The Columbia project serves best as an example of what we should not do to this area. How it got to be a finalist is beyond me.

Harvard #1015

Jury Summary:
“Bridging Innovation at Grand Crossing” leverages the east-west intracity connections made possible by Chouteau Greenway by creating a north-south “academic spine” along Grand Boulevard bridge. An urban northern edge and a biotech-oriented southern edge unites the Saint Louis University campus around a mixed-use node where academics, biotechnology, transit, recreation, commercial, and residential activities can concentrate.

Like so many of the proposals, this concept shortens the length of the Grand viaduct and adds buildings up to the sidewalk. Who was it that suggested this a month ago? Oh yeah, that would be me. It is nice to see others came to the same conclusion I did about the importance of urbanizing Grand.

This team left the Del Taco & Union Council Plaza buildings with a note, “streetscape to be improved.” I don’t think enough patterned sidewalk or landscaping will make this area urban enough. I’ve been known to spin through Del Taco’s drive-thru late at night (ok, early morning) but I think it needs to go.

Harvard #4110

Jury Summary:
“Aurora” creates a biotech research, development, and entrepreneurial center that represents Saint Louis University’s interface with the local biotech industry. It accepts the commercial corridors of Grand Boulevard, Chouteau Avenue, and Forest Park Boulevard, fills the interior of the blocks with appropriate uses, and establishes a symbiotic relationship with the Greenway.

This is a very nice proposal, with Grand getting a shorter bridge and urban makeover. This concept includes an intersection at Papin (the block north of Chouteau), as well as a new intersection, called Campus Drive, just south of the highway. A new bridge at Theresa Street will help connect areas on each side of the valley.

On the negative side their building massing is rather blocky. I would have liked to have seen more street grid between Grand and Spring on both the north & south areas. They also seemed to simply delete on & off ramps from I-64, something I wouldn’t mind so much but in realty not very practical.

But, I love that Grand from Chouteau to Forest Park is faced with a variety of buildings.

UC Berkeley

Jury Summary:
“Weave” proposes an urban prototype for St. Louis that rejects the creation of a specific-use redevelopment district and instead introduces explicit north-south connections throughout the site that weaves it into the communities to its north and south. While the Greenway is the major east-west cross-weave, smaller strips of green space weave through the site, eventually connecting with the Greenway. Reinforcing the vision of a community developed around transit and other urban amenities is a magnet school in close proximity to SLU and the Armory, redeveloped as a performing arts center.

The University of California at Berkeley project impresses me on multiple levels. In addition to making Grand a proper urban street they are seeking to “weave” areas together with four additional north-south bridges over Mill Creek Valley! More street grid is a good thing, especially in this case.

Like other finalists, this team created an intersection south of I-64. Unlike other teams, this one provided on & off ramps at Grand. Between the shorter bridge and Chouteau this team has two intersections.

Their proposal includes a large variety of building sizes, including a number of small scale buildings unseen on other proposals. This is especially important along Grand where they are using a number of smaller buildings to create an intimate walking environment.

I liked part of the text from their presentation on the urban form:

“Create strong north-south connections, explicitly rejecting current redevelopment plans (CORTEX EAST) in order to use bio-tech/university influx as a catalyst for weaving and knitting communities.

This is one smart team, rejecting the big CORTEX generic redevelopment plan and creating a pedestrian-friendly street grid. For my money this team from Berkeley should get first place.

Seven teams received honorable mentions. A team from Texas included a streetcar line along Grand to connect the theatre district near the Fox to the SLU medical campus — a good idea that can be expanded north and south. I also liked some of the housing they showed on their proposal.

Representatives from each of the four finalists will be in town on the 10th to actually view the site, they will be given a chance to revise their proposals. The winner will be announced on March 31st. I’m rooting for the team from Berkeley.

– Steve

 

Base of Park East Tower Leaves Much to be Desired




Parkeast Tower

Originally uploaded by urbanreviewstl.com.

Opus Development is well along on the construction of a new residential tower at the NW corner of Euclid & Laclede. The tower portion looks great. The base, however, leaves much to be desired.

Too much parking above grade to create much interest fo the pedestrian. Yes, they’ll have sidewalk retail but the space above the retail overpowers the sidewalk.

I’m not fond of reflective glass, which will cover the corner and other areas where they are attempting to bring some relief to the facade. Decorative metal will cover additional areas.

All in all I’m not impressed with the base. I’d like to see these developments look at putting a couple of levels of their parking below grade rather than all being above the retail.

Something different needs to be done as this is just not friendly.

– Steve

 

Proposed CWE Tower Dividing Area Residents

A group from the Urban St. Louis discussion forums are gathering this weekend to counter the recent efforts of a group opposing a new high-rise residential tower. Here is the notice added in the comments to a prior post:

NOTICE: A small but fierce coalition is holding pro-density, pro-city meeting in support of a controversial condo tower that is proposed for the corner of Lindell & Euclid in the CWE.

WHEN: Sunday, Feb. 26, 1:00pm

WHERE: The Grind Coffeehouse, 56 Maryland Plaza.

WHO: Anyone who is sick of seeing underutilized land sit and wither in high-profile sections of our grand city. The West End Word will be there to cover the meeting, as well as Alderwoman Lyda Krewson. Be there!

In November I did an article in the West End Word on this very proposed tower. At that time my basic argument was the height didn’t matter as much as the base:

The first 30 feet of building height adjacent to sidewalks should be active. We’ll call this the pedestrian zone – the portion of the building perceived by a person walking by. This might take the form of multiple-level retail space such as often employed by the likes of Urban Outfitters. It might take the form of two-story residential units over one floor of retail. Second- and third-floor balconies with their associated plants and umbrellas do wonders for visually animating a streetscape.

Opponents of the high-rise are objecting solely on its height. One wonders if it met the hight requirement of the local historic standards if they even care about other, more important, design issues. The pro-tower supports, in the same vein, seem to be supportive without any caveats for good street-level design.

I’m planning to attend the meeting on Sunday, I think it promises to be interesting at the very least. I wonder if Mike Owens will be covering this on the news?

– Steve

 

How Wide is Too Wide?

Today I was at the intersection of Washington & Jefferson. Having a few extra minutes in my schedule and the desire to be outside (couldn’t take the scooter this morning) I decided to measure pedestrian crossing across Washington Ave on the east side of the intersection.

Care to take any guesses?

60 feet? Ha!

75 feet? Get real.

100 feet? Close.

A whopping 105 from curb to curb in the center of the intersection. Granted we don’t have many pedestrians in the area at this time. But with loft development in the immediate vicinity this will soon change. Or maybe it won’t? With crossings this wide and no separate pedestrian crossing signals this area may be doomed to being lifeless.

Decades ago the city undertook a massive program of street widening to accommodate the auto. It is time invested in reversing past mistakes.

– Steve

 

Urbanists Taking Back the Streets in NYC

February 23, 2006 Books, Planning & Design Comments Off on Urbanists Taking Back the Streets in NYC

A friend and regular Urban Review reader sent me a link to an interesting new site, New York City Streets Renaissance Campaign:

Streets are more than just car corridors; they are valuable civic spaces and resources that need to be wisely allocated. The New York City Streets Renaissance Campaign is building the movement to re-imagine our streets as lively public places.

Amen.

Perhaps it is time to take back our streets from the territorial aldermen and developers lacking any urban vision…

– Steve

 

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe