Celebrating Blog’s 19th Anniversary

 

  Nineteen year ago I started this blog as a distraction from my father’s heart attack and slow recovery. It was late 2004 and social media & video streaming apps didn’t exist yet — or at least not widely available to the general public. Blogs were the newest means of …

Thoughts on NGA West’s Upcoming $10 Million Dollar Landscaping Project

 

  The new NGA West campus , Jefferson & Cass, has been under construction for a few years now. Next NGA West is a large-scale construction project that will build a new facility for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency in St. Louis, Missouri.This $1.7B project is managed by the U.S. Army …

Four Recent Books From Island Press

 

  Book publisher Island Press always impresses me with thoughtful new books written by people working to solve current problems — the subjects are important ones for urbanists and policy makers to be familiar and actively discussing. These four books are presented in the order I received them. ‘Justice and …

New Siteman Cancer Center, Update on my Cancer

 

  This post is about two indirectly related topics: the new Siteman Cancer Center building under construction on the Washington University School of Medicine/BJC campus and an update on my stage 4 kidney cancer. Let’s deal with the latter first. You may have noticed I’ve not posted in three months, …

Recent Articles:

Sunday Poll: Support or Oppose Medical Marijuana in Missouri?

 

Please vote below
Please vote below

Efforts are currently underway to gather enough signatures to place an item on a 2016 ballot to set up a legal medical marijuana industry in Missouri, the signature deadline is next month. Though just under half the states have medical cannabis programs, it remains controversial.

Hence, today’s poll:

The poll will remain open until 8pm tonight. Share your thoughts in the comments below and come back on Wednesday for a new post with my thoughts and the non-0scienmtific results.

— Steve Patterson

Reading: The Human City: Urbanism for the Rest of Us by Joel Kotkin

April 15, 2016 Books, Featured 1 Comment
 

humancity.kotkinThe title, The Human City: Urbanism for the Rest of Us, quickly got my attention. Here’s the publisher’s description:

In The Human City, internationally recognized urbanist Joel Kotkin challenges the conventional urban-planning wisdom that favors high-density, “pack-and-stack” strategies. By exploring the economic, social, and environmental benefits of decentralized, family-friendly alternatives, Kotkin concludes that while the word “suburbs” may be outdated, the concept is certainly not dead.

Aside from those wealthy enough to own spacious urban homes, people forced into high-density development must accept crowded living conditions and limited privacy, thus degrading their quality of life. Dispersion, Kotkin argues, provides a chance to build a more sustainable, “human-scale” urban environment.

After pondering the purpose of a city — and the social, political, economic, and aesthetic characteristics that are associated with urban living — Kotkin explores the problematic realities of today’s megacities and the importance of families, neighborhoods, and local communities, arguing that these considerations must guide the way we shape our urban landscapes. He then makes the case for dispersion and explores communities (dynamic small cities, redeveloped urban neighborhoods, and more) that are already providing viable, decentralized alternatives to ultra-dense urban cores.

The Human City lays out a vision of urbanism that is both family friendly and flexible. It describes a future where people, aided by technology, are freed from the constraints of small spaces and impossibly high real estate prices. While Kotkin does not call for low-density development per se, he does advocate for a greater range of options for people to live the way they want at various stages of their lives.

We are building cities without thinking about the people who live in them, argues The Human City. It’s time to change our approach to one that is centered on human values.
About the Author

Joel Kotkin is Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University, Executive Director of the Houston-based Center for Opportunity Urbanism, and Executive Editor of the widely read website, NewGeography.com. He is the author of seven previous books, and a regular contributor to the Daily Beast, Forbes.com, RealClearPolitics, and the Orange County Register. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Washington Post, City Journal, Politico, and many more outlets.

It’s true, there is a lot of middle ground between expensive high-density urbanity and low-density suburban sprawl. To live in a walkable neighborhood shouldn’t require a 6-figure income.

Here is the list of chapters:

  1. What Is a City For?
  2. The Importance of Everyday Life
  3. The Problem with Megacities
  4. Inside the “Glamour Zone”
  5. Post-Familial Places
  6. The Case for Dispersion
  7. How Should We Live?

I got permission to reprint the introduction:

BOOKS HAVE MANY ORIGINS, and that is also the case with this one. I started thinking about a new approach to urbanism after being ex- posed to a series of views—largely in favor of cramming people into ever-denser spaces—that now dominates most thinking about cities. I had also been exposed repeatedly to analyses, including some of my own, that rated cities largely from the perspective of their eco- nomic productivity.

Economic growth, of course, is critical to urban health and the lives of urban citizens. But how growth impacts daily life, I came to realize, is also important. If we build cities, as we increasingly do, in ways that accentuate divisions among the classes and decrease the quality of life for families—even to the point of discouraging people from having children—what have we accomplished? Even if skylines rise and architects create hitherto impossible-to-imagine structures, a city still primarily needs to be, as Descartes noted, “an inventory of the possible”1 for the vast majority of its citizens.

These thoughts came together for me when I was working in Singapore. Here was arguably the best-planned dense urban area in the world, a model of modernist design and post-industrial prosperity. Yet in doing scores of interviews and reviewing survey data, it became obvious to me that high-density living, coupled with enormous career pressures, was also producing high levels of anxiety and breaking down what had been an exceptionally strong familial culture.

I articulated these thoughts in a speech called “What Is a City For?” that I gave to the Singapore University of Technology and Design in the spring of 2013. It was published later that year by the Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities.2 In that address, I began to search out answers to that question. My thinking was further shaped by a suggestion from one of my colleagues, geographer Ali Modarres, to look at Aristotle, first and foremost, for some basic principles.

In the ensuing two years, the book began to take shape, although I knew much of it ran very much contrary to the prevailing wisdom about cities. Yet as I went through the historical literature and ob- served cities around the world, it became clear that there was an enormous gap between what planners, politicians, and much of the business community were advocating for—ever more density—and the everyday desires of most people, particularly working- and mid- dle-class families. It seemed only proper that someone speak to these aspirations as well.

In no way do I consider this book, in its essentials, anti-urban. In- stead, the task here is to redefine the city in a way that fits with modern realities and the needs of families. In this respect, the urban experience is simply not only confined to the inner city or old neighborhoods but also to the “sprawl” that now surrounds them in virtually every vibrant urban area in the world. As Gregg Easterbrook, contributing editor of the Atlantic and the Washington Monthly, asks, “Sprawl is caused by affluence and population growth, and which of these, exactly, do we propose to inhibit?”3

Many voices influenced this book. These include the writings of Fernand Braudel, Lewis Mumford, Frank Lloyd Wright, Peter Hall, H. G. Wells, Herbert Gans, and, although I differed from her on many ideas, Jane Jacobs. These figures from the past informed my reporting on the present; their focus on how people actually live, and what they desire, gave me necessary inspiration.

No field of study—technical or in the humanities—thrives when only one side or perspective is allowed free reign and granted a dis- pensation from criticism. The question of the future of cities is too important to be hemmed in by dogma and should, instead, invite
vigorous debate and discussion. My hope is that this book sparks at least a modicum of that debate by challenging the conventional think- ing on the future of cities and the urban form. This book was written with that hope.

JOEL KOTKIN

Orange, California, Fall 2015

(Reprinted with permission from The Human City by Joel Kotkin, Agate B2, 2016.)

We need more discussion about how to build cities that work for humans.

— Steve Pattterson

No Pedestrian Signal One Block From Busch Stadium

 

Monday was the Cardinals home opener, tens of thousands made their way into Busch Stadium III for the afternoon game. The current stadium opened a decade ago, the previous Busch Stadium opened to the North half a century ago, in 1966. So you’d think by now the pedestrian environment to/from the stadium has been refined by now? Sorry, no.

I give you a Clark Street crossing at 9th — a block West of Busch Stadium & Ballpark Village:

Looking North toward the stadium West garage, we can see the traffic light but no pedestrian signal. It rained earlier so the curb ramp is a pond.
Looking North toward the stadium West garage, we can see the traffic light but no pedestrian signal. It rained earlier so the curb ramp is a pond.

Looking South pedestrians have no signal or even a traffic light to determine when to cross Clark Street
Looking South pedestrians have no signal or even a traffic light to determine when to cross Clark Street

This is a common occurrence downtown, here’s why:

  • Lack of pedestrian signals at many signalized intersections throughout downtown
  • One-way streets mean pedestrians can see traffic light in one direction
  • But the opposite the direction they’re clueless, taking a risk when stepping off the curb

The intersection at 9th & Clark St isn’t typical — the interstate exit ramp complicates matters. It would be east for s person to attempt to cross here when vehicles have a green light — such as the highway exit.

Again, people have been walking to/from Cardinals games here for 50 years — the last 10 to the new stadium! The adjacent Westin Hotel in an old Cupples Station warehouse opened in 2001. I can see issues still existing a mile or more away — but this is just one block!

So now what? Someone needs to review every single intersection used by pedestrians on game days to see which are lacking. Then prioritize a list of updates to correct the shortcomings. Same goes for other attractions downtown and throughout the city, like:

  • Scottrade Center
  • Peabody Opera House
  • Kiener Plaza/Old Courthouse/Ely Smith Square/Arch
  • Soldiers’ Memorial (Reopening 2018)
  • Fox Theater/Powell Hall
  • Major transit stops (MetroBus & MetroLink)

This isn’t a lack of money — it’s a lack of priorities. Pedestrians aren’t valued in St. Louis so nobody bothers to think about how to attract/maintain them.

— Steve Patterson

 

Readers Split On Best Age For Legal Tobacco Sales

April 13, 2016 Politics/Policy Comments Off on Readers Split On Best Age For Legal Tobacco Sales
 

The Sunday Poll got more votes than usual, but the voting pattern stayed consistent for the 12 hours the poll was open. This indicates to me the subject was controversial & interesting — but the poll was not the target of a campaign to influence the final outcome.  Here are the results:

Q: What’s the right age for legal tobacco sales?

  • 12: 1 [1.69%]
  • 15: 2 [3.39%]
  • 18: 25 [42.37%]
  • 21: 25 [42.37%]
  • 24: 0 [0%]
  • Ban cigarettes: 6 [10.17%]
  • Unsure/No Answer: 0 [0%]

Ten percent were unrealistic — picking the option to ban legal sales. I abhor tobacco, but a ban on sales isn’t a good idea. So why this topic?

A measure to raise the age to buy tobacco from 18 to 21 in Illinois got initial approval Tuesday, with the lawmaker behind the proposal telling colleagues he wants to make it harder for youth to pick up a lifelong habit.

“Smoking will kill you and before it kills you it will harm your lungs, your heart and other various organs,” said Chicago Democratic Sen. John Mulroe, the bill sponsor, before reading the surgeon general’s warning on a box of cigarettes during a committee hearing.

The bill comes as California Gov. Jerry Brown considers whether to sign legislation that would raise the tobacco-buying age to 21 in his state. Last year, Hawaii became the first state in the country to do so.

The Senate advanced Mulroe’s bill to the full chamber on a 6-3 vote. (Post-Dispatch)

I’ll be watching to see if SB3011 passes the Illinois General Assembly. We know that many kids start smoking well before their 18th birthday, would increasing the legal age to 21 make any difference? I can’t speak to that, but the Tobacco 21 movement thinks it can help reduce teens from smoking:

After a decade of consistent decreases in tobacco use by teenagers, The National Youth Tobacco Survey reports that in 2014 overall use of tobacco among youth rose, exposing dangerous new trends. Clever marketing by the tobacco industry, pushing small cigars, hookahs, e-cigarettes, and flavored vaping products, has put millions of young people at risk of lifelong lethal nicotine addiction.

There is no one magic bullet for preventing youth tobacco use. Increased taxes, counter-marketing and school programs all play a role. However, funding has shriveled and tax increases face mounting opposition causing fewer and fewer to be enacted. There is now growing interest in another tool: access restriction to age 21.

Last month the California legislature voted to raise the age to 21, Gov Brown hasn’t yet signed the measure.

— Steve Patterson

 

 

The 2013 Northside-Southside Study Was About Development, Not Transit

 

In 2006/07 I attended many public meetings on a proposed Northside-Southside light rail line, it was finalized in 2008. In writing about these plans in the last year, people have asked if I’d seen the new study that was done, it’s not the same as it was in 2008. The study they’re referring to, Transit Oriented Development Study for the PROPOSED NORTHSIDE-SOUTHSIDE ALIGNMENT, isn’t anything new on the actual transportation side. It was completed in July 2013. At first, it wasn’t online. I pushed to get it online…downloading it on April 18 2014.

Today’s post is about this study — dispelling myths about what it is — and isn’t.  My criticism of running high-speed light rail down streets like Natural Bridge & Cherokee is the street grid will be severed to achieve desired speeds.  I’m an advocate of rail transit, and the preferred route. If it were up to me, I’d build it immediately — as modern streetcar/tram instead of light rail. This greatly simplifies construction by eliminating the need to reduce conflicts with a train speeding down the center of the street.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assist the City of St. Louis, its neighborhoods, and developers with preparing for and taking advantage of transit investment along the proposed Northside-Southside Alignment.

As the study title & objective indicate — it is about development related to proposed stations.  The study is a detailed look at two stations on the proposed alignment: Kingshighway & Cherokee.

This study builds upon the goals set forth in previous plans, while giving a strong framework for decision-making regarding Transit Oriented Development, which ,as defined by HUD, is compact, mixed-use development in close proximity to transit facilities. Transit Oriented Development promotes sustainable communities by providing people of all ages and incomes with improved access to transportation and housing choices and reduced transportation costs that reduce the negative impacts of automobile travel on the environment and the economy. This report aspires to meet these goals and study the Alignment at this higher level of detail, with a comprehensive analysis of each of the proposed stations, a set of Station Area Plans that describe detailed development programs, building form and distribution, street improvements, and environmental analysis for the proposed Cherokee and Kingshighway Stations. These two stations were selected because they embody a similar range of challenges and opportunities to the other station areas along the Alignment. In future studies of the other station areas, lessons from Kingshighway and Cherokee can be readily applied.

The study makes no mention of what happens between stations.

Two East-West streets are between Cherokee & Arsenal-- Utah & Wyoming
Two East-West streets are between Cherokee & Arsenal– Utah & Wyoming

Depending upon how the Arsenal & Cherokee stations would be designed — both Wyoming & Utah could be cut off — no more crossing at either. Most likely the Northbound platforms would be located north of Arsenal & Cherokee, respectively. The Southbound platforms would be located South of each. This, rather than a shared platform, requires the least amount of width.

Looking East across Jefferson at Wyoming, May 2013. Benton Park on left, Cherokee Recreation Center on right
Looking East across Jefferson at Wyoming, May 2013. Benton Park on left, Cherokee Recreation Center on right

The distance between the two proposed stations is 4/10ths of a mile. Another 4/10ths North would be a Gravois station. The streets of Crittenden, Pestalozi, & Lynch would become no-crossing points. Another 4/10ths of a mile North to a station/crossing at Russell, with no-crossing allowed in between.

We should build North-South rail connection, but not at the expense of the street grid and the access it currently affords. Build modern streetcar on the Northside-Southside route. Keep the grid fully intact.

The study showed the current Siemens high-floor light rail vehicles in the new proposed street-runing lines. Not going to happen. In-street platforms and high-floor vehicles don’t work together.

The Siemens SD-400 & SD-460 vehicles are a 1980s design, used in only three regions worldwide: Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Valencia, Venezuela. Shown: Shrewsbury opening August 2006
The Siemens SD-400 & SD-460 vehicles are a 1980s design, used in only three regions worldwide: Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Valencia, Venezuela. Shown: Shrewsbury opening August 2006

Upcoming modern streetcar lines in Cincinatti & Kansas City use the same 100% low-floor vehicles. (CAF's Urbos 3/100)
Upcoming modern streetcar lines in Cincinatti & Kansas City use the same 100% low-floor vehicles. (CAF’s Urbos 3/100)

The best solution to simplify platforms and make ADA-compliance easier is 21st Century 100% low-floor vehicles.

From Wikipedia — a list of cities with Urbos 70 and Urbos 100 vehicles:

  1. Cuiabá, Brazil (40 ordered)
  2. Salvador, Brazil
  3. Belgrade, Serbia (30)
  4. Seville, Spain
  5. Granada, Spain
  6. Cádiz, Spain
  7. Debrecen, Hungary (18)
  8. Edinburgh, Scotland (27)
  9. Málaga, Spain
  10. Besançon, France (19)
  11. Nantes, France (8)
  12. Zaragoza, Spain (21)
  13. West Midlands, England (£40 million order for 20, with options for five)
  14. Kaohsiung, Taiwan (9 ordered; ACR system built in; no need for catenary)
  15. Cincinnati, Ohio, USA ($25 million for 5 trams)
  16. Sydney, Australia. ($20m order for 6 trams; order subsequently expanded to 12 trams)
  17. Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany (12 ordered)
  18. Kansas City, Missouri, USA
  19. Budapest, Hungary (47; €90m order for the 47 trams)
  20. Utrecht, Netherlands (27 ordered; to be operational in 2018)

See videos of the Urbos in Belgrade (Serbia)Kansas City, and Cincinatti.

The beauty of modern streetcar vehicles is they can be used for light rail as well. So if the lines were to continue into North & South St. Louis County the same vehicles could travel at higher speeds on closed right-of-way.

When it comes to the actual transit design of Northside-Southside, the final 2008 study still remains. The 2013 was a look at development options — a good thing considering how we’ve failed to capitalize on existing light rail stations since the first line opened in 1993.

— Steve Patterson

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe