Brick vs. Frame in St. Louis

St. Louis is a brick city.  Every block in every neighborhood you see brick.  I love St. Louis’ heritage of brick.  But I love wood framed structures too.

“Frame” is a reference not just to the exterior material but to the structural construction method.  St. Louis’ brick structures are made of structural brick walls.

Newer brick structures are wood framed with a veneer of brick applied.  Most framed structures have siding covering the framework.

The above house is a beautiful wood-framed example from my home town of Oklahoma City.  Similar homes can be seen in the St. Louis region. This house was never modest, originally built for a growing middle class.  In the City of St. Louis frame homes are typically modest:

I love the simplicity of these homes on the Hill North of I-44.

In places you will see frame homes next to the more standard brick, such as above.  To my eye the contrast is quite pleasing.  With so many stunning brick buildings in the City of St. Louis I think we unfairly dismiss our more humble frame structures.

Both construction methods have their own pros and cons.  Both are stable if they have a good foundation and water is kept out.  Renovation of each has issues.  Frame structures can be insulated easier than brick structures.  Ditto for running wiring & plumbing.  Wood siding & trim needs paint.   Weatherproof (vinyl) siding & trim ruins the look of these structures. Brick must stay pointed.

– Steve Patterson

Poll, How Long Before the City of St. Louis Will Be Smoke-Free

You oppose, favor or are neutral about smoke-free legislation.  Regardless of your perspective on the merits of smoke-free laws, I want your opinion on when you think the City of St. Louis will be covered by smoke-free legislation. Here is the question:

Clayton will go smoke-free in July 2010.  Regardless of your view on such laws, at what point do you think the City of St. Louis will go smoke-free, if ever?

The possible answers are:

• Before the end of 2009
• January 2010
• same time as Clayton – July 2010
• January 2011
• Only upon a statewide ban
• January 2012
• Never — not for City or Missouri
• By January 2015
• Unsure/Don’t Care

Remember this is not about when you want it passed or don’t want it passed. You may, for example, oppose smoke-free laws but think it will be in effect by January 2011.  Or if you are like me, you want these laws in effect yesterday, but realize it will not happen as quickly as you’d like.  So when you vote in the poll don’t select the answer you’d like to see but what you think will be the outcome.

You can find the poll in the sidebar to the right.

– Steve Patteron

Contributors Wanted

Since October 31, 2004 UrbanReviewSTL.com has published nearly 1,900 posts on a broad range of topics.  Most were written by me, Steve Patterson.  Others were written by guests.  Yesterday marked a continued evolution for this blog.

What happened yesterday?

The first post written by a “contributor” happened.  Jim ‘JimmyZ‘ Zavist has frequently added to the discussion in the comments and has written numerous guest posts.  I recently asked Jim to be my first contributor.  He agreed and yesterday I posted his first piece.

I’m seeking additional contributors, up to 9 more.  Contributors cannot make the final post to the site but they are granted limited access to the back end of the site where they can work on posts and then submit them to me for approval and final posting to this site.  If you have thought about starting a blog or have ideas of topics or viewpoints you think should be presented here then I want to talk to you.

Some initial ground rules:

• I reserve the right to make up new ground rules as necessary.
• You don’t have to agree with me.  This blog is about civic discourse.
• Topics can run the gamut from design to policy as long as they have a St. Louis connection.
• The pay sucks — zero.  I may treat you to lunch.
• You must use your real name and we must have met in person.  If we’ve not met yet but you are interested please consider applying — we can meet to seal the deal.
• This cannot be used as a sales pitch for your product or services but I have no objection to a one sentence bio at the end of the piece which may include a link to your website.
• There are no assignments or deadlines.  Contributors write what interests them, when they want.

Some perspectives I’d like to see represented:

• A person living on the edge of the region that would like to move closer to the core — the person seeking a more urban lifestyle.
• Racial minorities living in the region.
• Former St. Louisans now living outside the region.
• Elected officials that want to speak on issues.
• A parent with a school age child in the St. Louis public school system.
• Resident(s) from the Illinois side of the St. Louis region.

The information I need from potential contributors:

• Your first & last name — as you would sign your posts.
• The perspective you’d bring to UrbanReviewSTL.com.
• A personal email address (will be kept private).
• Your mobile phone number (will be kept private).
• A 2-3 sentence bio to use on your profile.
• If you have a website, the URL. This goes in the profile for each contributor.
• email the above along with why you’d make a good contributor to steve at urbanreviewstl dot com.

Rest assured, I’m not going anywhere.  I am finishing my Masters degree this Fall and anticipate having less time to maintain the same pace.  Contributors will help ensure there will be new material daily.

– Steve Patterson

The return of the Kiel Opera House

Being somewhat of a rarity, not being from around here, I have no warm spot in my heart for the old Kiel Opera House. I have been to the Fox, so I know that that’s a pretty nice facility. The Board of Aldermen has approved a financing package to help reopen the old Kiel. The folks at the Fox aren’t happy, and obviously don’t want any new competition, city-subsidized or not.

I have mixed feelings on the whole issue. My libertarian side questions why the city should be involved in subsidizing one business more than another (as if they should be subsidizing any of them). My architectural side likes seeing the effort being made to save and reuse an older, notable building. And my consumer side likes having more choices, especially in the city. I’d be really interested in seeing what others are thinking, especially those who remember “the old days”!

– Jim Zavist

McCormack Baron Salazar Gets ADA Curb Ramps All Wrong at Renaissance Place

The old Bluemeyer public housing project was a combination of high-rise and low-rise buildings, all fairly disconnected from each other and the adjacent public streets.

The entire complex was razed( in a few phases) and the replacement project is nearing completion.  The map below shows the project area:

Everything inside the shaded area is new.  Everything from underground infrastructure to the buildings to the street grid, curbs sidewalks and curb ramps.  McCormack Baron Salazar had a clean slate to work with.  Here is how they summarize the project:

Renaissance Place at Grand | St. Louis, MO
402 units
Total Development Investment  $68,792,300

The Arthur Blumeyer public housing development, constructed in 1968, consisted of four high-rise and 42 low-rise buildings and housed 1,162 families, including 585 elderly. The development is located north of Grand Center, the mid-town arts district in Saint Louis.

The Federal Omnibus Consolidated Reconciliation Act of 1996 requires that viability assessments be performed for public housing projects of 300 or more units with vacancy rates of 10 percent or higher. This law requires units to be removed from the housing stock within five years if public housing costs exceed the cost of housing vouchers and if long-term viability of the subject property cannot be assured through reasonable revitalization plan. In 1999, Blumeyer’s two elderly high-rise buildings, 174 of the family townhouses and both of the family high rises were declared non-viable by HUD.

The St. Louis Housing Authority took the opportunity to collaborate with the larger community, and elected to pursue a strategy of transformation through HUD’s HOPE VI program. The application submission was successful and the Blumeyer public housing site was awarded $35,000,000 in HOPE VI grant funds.

Overall the new project is quite nice.

Above is one of the new street intersections, Franklin Ave & Josephine Baker Ave (map).  I’ve drawn lines to show the path at the intersection that an able-bodied person would walk — a straight line.  No surprise.  While walking with my cane I’d follow the same path as well — dealing with the curbs is preferable to the longer distance required to use the ramps.

But what if you use a wheelchair or mobility scooter?  Keep in mind that the 1st floor units are accessible.  The other day I saw two different residents using mobility scoters in the area.  So the disabled are expected in the immediate area.

Above is the same intersection with one path for wheelchair/scooter users shown in red.  Rather than being able to continue in a staright line the disabled must angle out and cross one street while being very close with traffic going parallel.

This intersection needed twice the number of ramps so that a straight path could be maintained.  Rather than a single ramp out at the corners each quadrant would have two ramps – one per direction of travel.  Keep in mind that the entire intersection is new.  We are not talking about the expense to retrofit the intersection with 8 vs 4 ramps.  The additional cost would have been minimal when this was done from scratch.

In St. Louis and other cities retrofit ramps are often placed at the corners.  As cities were retrofitting ramps following the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 they had limited budgets.  Doing four ramps per corner was faster and cheaper than eight.  Additionally, obstacles like sewer inlets prevent more ideal placement of ramps.  The corner ramp was a valid retrofit compromise.

But in new construction the corner ramps are unacceptable.  There is no excuse for the way the ramps were placed in the above project.  None.  I’d like to see a public flogging of the engineers that designed these streets, sidewalks and ramps.  Better yet, they should have to live here and use a wheelchair to get around!

It may be too late but the city should not accept these streets from the developer.  Someone’s Errors & Omissions insurance policy should pay to correct these ramps.