Large Public Spaces Require Bold Plantings

For the last few years the plantings downtown have been spectacular. They have not been little tiny fragile flowers. Instead they have been large & bold — commanding attention from far away, drawing the visitor in to get a closer inspection.

Planning planting beds for expansive public spaces viewed from different angles requires a different approach than what you might do at home in front of the foundation.

A fews years back I met the guy responsible for the annual plantings along Market, in Kiener Plaza, in front of and on City Hall and so on. Unfortunately his name and the name of the organization escapes me. Well, kudos!

I hope to enlist the help of the group responsible for these plantings to help with efforts in Lucas Park next Spring. We don’t need minuscule pansies or marigolds. We need seriously large plants such as these. We don’t need a large variety, a few well placed planting beds and perhaps a few containers would do the trick.

What needs to be determined is if we have enough gardeners among the loft dwellers to plant & maintain some beds like these. I think it is possible. This can accomplish a couple of things — create a beautiful sunken garden in Lucas Park while perhaps also giving downtown residents a place to practice their green thumb.

I’m collecting images such as these to show at the upcoming Design Charrette for Lucas Park on Monday November 17th. While I’m talking to these folks I need to see if they can do something with the medians along 18th near Union Station and Truman Parkway near Ameren. That bare dirt & weeds scheme just isn’t cutting it anymore.

A Pop Culture Look at Urban Renewal From 46 Years Ago Today

In August a couple of friends told me about an episode of ‘Car 54 Where Are You?’ dealing with Urban Renewal. The episode, ‘Occupancy August 1st’, of the police sitcom set in the Bronx, first Aired on October 21, 1962 – forty six years ago tonight. This was five years prior to my birth and although I had heard of the show I don’t recall ever seeing an episode from its 2-season run. Thanks to YouTube I was able to find and watch this episode — what a gem!

The show opens on the construction site of a new public housing project with workers spotting a woman on the 14th floor. The workers thinking she is going to jump call the police. The job foreman calls the Building Commissioner to explain about the woman on the construction site. The Commissioner responds, “Oh no, another delay?”

Officers Toody & Muldoon from Car 54 arrive. When they make their way to the 14th floor (via a beam hoisted by a crane) they find a sweet Jewish woman, Mrs Bronson, setting up home in the unfinished building still lacking walls. They explain to her “you can’t stay here.” She rebuts, “For two years I’ve been waiting to move in and now ‘You can’t stay here.’ In my own apartment I can’t stay?”

She produces a lease which begins on August 1st. In the exchange with the officer she asks what the sign out front says. He responds, “Occupancy August 1st.” What is the date? August 1st.

“In the old tenement when they tore it down for six months they kept nagging with papers and eviction notices. A new apartment they promised me. Now I’m in the new apartment and it’s ‘Get Out, Get Out.”

“I’m back in the Bronx. For two years I lived with my daughter in Brooklyn. She’s a lovely girl but who can live with her.”

Lots of great lines. At one point Mrs Bronson asks the Architect, Hilton Hartford Harlow (played by Charles Nelson Riley), to make sure the electric & gas meters are above the icebox. He indicates the building will have refrigerators and the meters will be in the basement.

“You mean there won’t be electric or gas men to come here to check the meters and their won’t be an ice man to sit and talk with me for a half hour? What are you building for me here a jail? Apartments are for people to visit.”

“But this is progress!” replies the Architect.

“You are making so much progress I could drop dead and nobody would find me in 10 years.”

The 22-minute episode is on YouTube in four segments (Note @ 12:40pm – the embedded video is not working correctly, please use the links to watch the video segments)

Part 1 of 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MP_PUhNUYk

Part 2 of 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVrAqjH8wDY

Part 3 of 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnnOvCkLgeo

Part 4 of 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ0qAVH0Tj0

All the characters are in place, the sweet woman that loved her old tenement, the uncaring building commissioner, the architect that cares more about his reputation than building a good space for people. An interesting step back in time indeed.

Hadley Township Redevelopmemt, A Planning & Policy Failure

In the 1940s-60s many neighborhoods were razed for grand urban renewal schemes. These were often the oldest parts of cities and they often showed signs of decay because of deferred maintenance & lack up updates during the Great Depression and WWII. Commonly called “slum clearance” the practice was also known as “Negro removal.” The replacements for these neighborhoods were all failures. Planning practices failed
millions of people and cost taxpayers billions. In the City of St. Louis nearly all of these areas have now been wiped clean of the failed urban renewal projects and started over.

But in inner ring suburbs of St Louis County we are seeing these past mistakes repeated. Starting in 1991 Kirkwood annexed and later wiped out half of the Meacham Park neighborhood, an area first platted in 1892. This area was and is a troubled area. To read redevelopment documents you’d think it was the street layout and 25-foot wide lots that sold drugs on the streets. Half the neighborhood was razed for a Target/Wal-Mart/Lowe’s big box center adjacent to I-44 at Kirkwood Rd (aka Lindbergh).

Brentwood must have liked what Kirkwood did because they wiped out another lower middle class black neighborhood for their own Target at Eager & I-170/I-40. Or did Brentwood come first and Kirkwood follow their example?

Maplewood got into the game by razing a neighborhood along Hanley for a horrible strip center anchored by Wal-Mart, Sam’s & Lowe’s.

Richmond Heights has their own long established predominantly black neighborhood, Hadley Township, in the SE corner of Hanley and I-64 (hwy 40). Unlike the other areas mentioned, Hadley Township was a respectable middle class area. Homes were mostly owner-occupied and well maintained. But then their municipal government decided to take the path these others did — designated an entire area adjacent to a highway for redevelopment. Of course they have other neighborhoods adjacent to the highway at major roads but those have wealthier white residents who might be able to stop a redevelopment plan.

In January 2006 — nearly three years ago, I attended a Richmond Heights meeting where prospective developers presented their ideas to the city and public. The place was packed. Most were concerned about how much they’d receive for their homes — long before realizing they were in the wrong place and were going to be forcibly removed through eminent domain. Few cared what was going to be built in place of their homes because they’d no longer be there to care.

The Richmond Heights City Council picked what I thought was the least desirable of the proposals. The good thing was they made a decision. That meant residents could finally move forward with their lives — get bought out & relocate. No more waiting. Or so they thought.

This past week they and the rest of the public learned the developer doesn’t have the money to move forward. Like the project that couldn’t in Sunset Hills (I-44 and Lindbergh) an entire neighborhood is caught in a weird situation. Some folks have already moved and now have two mortgages. Some were bought out and those properties are boarded. It is uncertain if the project will ever get done even if the city grants the developer the 1-year extension they have requested.

In too deep.

When this all started you had a stable middle class neighborhood. That has now been destroyed — not by bulldozers but by a failed planning process and a political system that is willing to toss aside good people and a stable area to chase regional sales tax dollars.

Those who still remain are no longer in the same neighborhood they loved. This is what too often happens when we start thinking of wholesale replacement of an area. What should happen is to determine what is best for the community and guide growth in that direction over time through the use of zoning. This would guide the area to gradually change and transform slowly – in line with the natural market.

The planners & officials responsible for this debacle all need to resign in shame.

Prior posts:

• 1/12/2006 – announcement of public meeting
• 1/13/2006 – review of proposals
• 2/9/2006 – City Council makes selection

Further Reading:

• 8/29/2008 – Biz Journal article on prior short term extension
• Richmond Heights official Hadley Township Redevelopment web page.
• Developer’s website for this project, Hadley Heights & Hadley Center.

Neighborhood Residents Spiff Up Amberg Park

Saturday morning residents of the Western portion of the Dutchtown neighborhood cleaned up their local park, Amberg Park. I stopped by to see how the project was going.

The park is located in the city’s 25th Ward where I ran (and lost 44.1% to 55.9%) for Alderman in 2005. Many of those working are regular readers of UrbanReviewSTL and a number said they voted for me. In the election I got more votes in the two precincts East of Grand where I lived but I lost the election West of Grand. Ancient history at this point.

Like my own group downtown it is nice to see residents taking charge in their neighborhood. Some say they are just newcomers taking over an existing group while they say this group is new. Regardless of the origins, these are the people that are actively doing something positive in the community. You know the old saying, actions speak louder than words. On this day they spoke volumes through their hard work.

Kudos!

View all 35 of my pictures from this event here.

What Is A Maverick?

We’re hearing the word Maverick a lot the election cycle. But what is a Maverick anyway?

A dictionary definition of maverick is:

mav·er·ick (mvr-k, mvrk)

n.

1. An unbranded range animal, especially a calf that has become separated from its mother, traditionally considered the property of the first person who brands it.

2. One that refuses to abide by the dictates of or resists adherence to a group; a dissenter.

adj.

Being independent in thought and action or exhibiting such independence: maverick politicians; a maverick decision.

---

[Possibly after Samuel Augustus Maverick (1803-1870), American cattleman who left the calves in his herd unbranded .]

Hmm, OK. We know that Palin likes to shoot unbranded animals.

The car guy in me cannot help but think of the Ford model every time I hear Tina Fey impersonating Palin and saying Mavericky.

Ford gave the Maverick an 8-year run, something I hope American voters do not give Palin.

After 8 years with Maverick, Ford dropped the name — they never used it again. It was supposed to be an economical car but it proved too heavy to live up to that promise. It also has serious rust issues.

When introduced many people fell for the Maverick but sales tapered off after after a strong initial showing. Buyers realized the competition was much more capable of meeting their needs.

Initially it was only available as a 2-door model but sticking to that formula limited the appeal to a broader base and a 4-door version was added later. The first few years the Maverick lacked a glove box.

The Ford Granada/Mercury Monarch (1975-82) was designed to replace the Maverick but they worked together on showroom floor for a few years. However, sales of the Maverick dropped after the Granada was introduced – it really wasn’t what buyers wanted.

The Maverick was built on a modified Ford Falcon platform dating to 1960.  Thus it was the same old thing they had been selling but dressed up in a younger skin.  It was outdated by the time it hit the showroom floors.  The competition was entirely new & fresh making the Maverick look even more dated.

After 8 years Ford put an end to the Maverick.