Brilliance Continues at Loughborough Commons

I’ve gotten lots of good material from Loughborough Commons over the last couple of years. They start off by taking homes on the corner of their large site. They open the Schnuck’s without any pedestrian access from the public street (including a bus stop used by employees and customers). The Lowes still lacks a pedestrian access route as required under federal civil rights law, the ADA.

One of my favorites was the curb ramp at the bottom of a flight of stairs:

I also enjoyed the half buried fire hydrant:

But they managed to correct this:

Note the pedestrian crossing in the upper left. Behind me is parking, including a couple of disabled spots. However people parking behind me have no way to get to this sidewalk, curb cut and crossing unless they have the ability to walk through the planter that separates the parking from the walk. But that is OK because they’ve got you covered:

Brilliant! They have two crosswalks 20ft apart and one is of little use to those its intended to serve.  The hydrant, walk and crosswalk from above is at the front of the vehicle in the above image.

Last month the Suburban Journal reported a Fifth Third Bank branch and a Burger King will be built on two of the four outlots. Of course these two are also required by the ADA to have a pedestrian access route to their front doors. We’ll see if that happens or if they end up out of compliance like the Lowe’s.

But hey, had they built a nice urban mixed use project on this site I’d have nothing to complain or laugh about. Again, they have provided me with a wealth of content. I have a feeling the bank and Burger King will simply be more of the same.

Food, Clothing and Shelter

The basics of life.  We need food for nutrition to keep our bodies going.  We need clothing to cover our bodies for a sense of modesty and in the winter warmth.  We need shelter as a place to rest our fed and clothed bodies.  Everything else is a luxury.  Cable, Cars, and even my iPhone – all luxuries.  For many in our society they don’t have the three basics, most notably shelter.

My first class back at SLU this Fall is a law class called Housing & Community Development.  Our reading for today was on the right to housing.  Do we have a right to be provided shelter if we are outside the margins for private housing?

The goal of the Federal Housing Act of 1949 was a “decent home…for every American family.”  That is a tall order.  Since that act became law government has had many programs designed to accomplish that goal.  Everything from building housing to rent vouchers have been tried.  Yet we still have Americans that are homeless and others with less than decent shelter.

Clearly the private market doesn’t work for everyone. Was the goal of a decent home for every American family simply too ambitious?  Well, I have reading to finish – discuss.

Watson Road, Revisited

A guest editorial by Jim Zavist, AIA

A couple of months ago, I did a guest post on the work starting at Pietro’s Restaurant, to apparently construct an outdoor seating area (view post). Now that the work is essentially complete, I have some more observations:

One, the new work was done professionally and is a good addition to an established neighborhood business – it’s always good to see reinvestment, it’s evidence that an area is doing well.

Two, my original assumptions (based on the foundations in place) were correct – the new seating area is raised above sidewalk level by ±1′ and is covered by a large awning. I’m confident that “part two” will happen later this year, as the weather cools – the clear vinyl sides will be rolled down and the space heaters will be turned on, and what was once public space will truly become private.

Three, the remaining sidewalk is a mixed bag. On the positive side, all the old concrete around the new patio was removed and replaced with new, eliminating any potential trip hazards. Two, the on-street parking does buffer the remaining public space pretty well – it looks tight driving by, but it doesn’t feel overly tight walking by. But on the negative side, even though this is new work, the cross slope exceeds ADAAG limits, so it remains somewhat difficult for people with disabilities to navigate the area.

Four, I did get an email response from Ald. Hanrahan on why she approved the request to occupy the public right-of-way. Her “defense” was that Stelina’s Café (up the street) had established a precedent when they were granted a permit to place planters in the public right-of-way. In my view, the two situations are not at all comparable, but in her view, a valid case was made by Pietro’s. I guess that’s why I’m such a stickler when it comes to letting anything that can be viewed as precedential being approved with little or no public input.

And five, unlike Stelina’s planters (which were a small investment and can be easily removed), Pietro’s investment is going to be with us for many years. I just find it unfortunate that the process for allowing this usurpation of the public realm can and does occur with no apparent public input. Yes, I know we live in a representative democracy, that our representatives won’t always vote the way we would want them to, and that “this is the way we’ve always done things around here”. The public doesn’t need to comment on every building permit. But when it comes to semi-permanent changes to public property, there needs to be something more stringent and open than one person’s untrained opinion being the final say.

Bottom line, this a good addition to a neighborhood business that simply goes too far. The public realm is precious – once it’s “gone”, it’s very hard to reclaim it. It’s up to our city staff and our elected officials to sometimes be the “bad guys”, to do their jobs, and to say just no, you’re simply asking for too much. As I said in the first post, I’d be a lot more sympathetic if there were no other real options. But this is a case where the building’s owner had multiple options that would not have impacted the public sidewalk. The new patio could’ve been built shallower but wider, with the same amount of, or even more, square feet – the building is set back from the sidewalk. Or, heaven forbid, several of their many parking spaces could’ve been used instead. But for whatever reason(s), the decision was made that a patio of this size would be the “best” solution, with little or no consideration of the negative impacts to local pedestrians and the existing streetscape and its existing, consistent, urban setbacks.

Local Architect Jim Zavist was born in upstate New York, raised in Louisville KY, spent 30 years in Denver Colorado and relocated to St. Louis in 2005.

Steve’s added commentary:

Thanks Jim for your fine contributions to the dialog. I’ve visited this location twice since the first post ran in late June. Jim’s observations are spot-on. It is nice to see a local business doing well enough to reinvest in their location. However, in this instance, their location has been expanded into the public’s space.

The cross slope is a serious issue. This is the side to side slope relative to the path of travel. First, someone in a manual wheelchair has a much more difficult time trying to keep the chair going straight ahead — a lot of energy is consumed just trying to keep from getting pushed off the curb and into the street. And for those of us that do walk with a cane I can tell you that a cross slope is also a challenge to deal with. The general idea with new concrete work is to provide just enough slope to shed water. At the outer edges of sidewalks the cross slope does get excessive as the sidewalk is angled down to meet the curb. This is all the more reason to preserve a wider sidewalk space.

Interestingly there remains private land to the south of the new patio (as shown in the first photo above). They could have made the patio shallower so as to not invade the pubic right of way but made it longer to get sufficient seating capacity. As pointed out above they also have a very large surface parking lot which could have been used. However, I do like the idea of the patio being adjacent to the public sidewalk as that can enhance the pedestrian experience if done right. But this patio squeezes the pedestrian and diminishes the public space. In the very least I would have insisted they create some separation between their surface parking and the public sidewalk.

The remaining space is minimally passable. But we shouldn’t seek to reach for the minimums when it comes to pedestrian space. We must raise our standards.

The Dawn of a New Day for Grand and Gravois

“The Dawn of a New Day for Grand and Gravois” proudly proclaimed the brochure for the January 5th, 1929 opening of the South Side National Bank. The art deco building was constructed during 1928 to serve as the new home for the combined South Side Bank and Farmers and Merchants Trust as it became the South Side National Bank.

South Side was formed in 1891 by Adolphus Busch. The bank had originally been located at Broadway & Pestalozzi, a logical location next to the family brewery. By the late 20s many depositors lived in the then new neighborhoods further West of the brewery. Southside merged with the Farmers and Merchants Trust that had moved into their new structure on the SE corner of Grand & Gravois in 1914. It was decided a new building was necessary to serve the growing city.

The Southwest corner of Grand & Gravois was selected for the new structure, replacing a popular tavern. By the time the bank opened the #70 Grand streetcar line was popular and well traveled.

Looking West down Gravois. Note the streetcar tracks & overhead line. Also note the bike to the right of the main entry. Given the cars I’d say this is a late 1940s image.

In the first part of the 20th Century the intersection urbanized as did each Grand and Gravois. Down Grand was a new Sears. In all directions were goods and services.

A 1960 photo looking north along Grand in the book Streets & Streetcars of St Louis by Andrew D. Young shows the Northeast corner as a gas station but the Northwest corner still had 2-story urban storefront buildings intact (p128). Over the latter part of the 20th Century the area de-urbanized with White Castle taking up residence on the formerly urban Northwest corner.

In 2000 the bank announced its intention to sell the property to Walgreen’s which would raze the structure in favor of their suburban prototype. Many of us were vocally upset. Meetings were held down the street at Al Smith’s Feasting Fox at Grand & Meramec. It was at these meetings that I first met now State Rep Mike Daus, Ald Craig Schmid, Christian Saller (a 2007 candidate for Alderman) and then private citizen Jennifer Florida.

We held protests and did everything legally possible to stop the sale and demolition. It worked, the demolition permit request was withdrawn. The future of the building was still very much uncertain.

Jennifer Florida, who was out front in the opposition to demolition, was elected alderman in 2001, succeeding Marge Vining by narrowly defeating Mike Daus. Florida continued to work hard to secure the future of the building. The bank was bought out by Allegiant Bank who agreed to donate the building and land to a neighborhood not-for-profit, Grand-Oak Hill. At least the building was safe from demolition, however, it was also now vacant as Allegiant had a newer banking facility down Grand near Ted Drewes.

The remaining vintage buildings at this important intersection became part of a small historic district. My friend Lyyn Josse, then with Landmarks Association, prepared the nomination for the building to the National Register of Historic Places. Listing on the national register affords no legal protection against demolition but it makes getting historic rehab tax credits much easier.

After a few years in limbo West End Realty and The Lawrence Group had a plan for the building – 13 condos in the tower with commercial uses in the base. In 2006 construction began in earnest. Today, renovations are finished. While a tenant hasn’t been found for the spectacular banking lobby, several smaller spaces have commercial enterprises and eight of the condos are occupied. Which brings me to my sales pitch. I’m pleased to report that The Lawrence Group selected Circa Properties to represent them in finding the last five buyers for the condo. Myself and co-agent Leigh Maibes are the listing agents.

On a personal note I’m glad to see more and more buildings like this become adapted for residential use. Even though the recovery following my February stroke is going well I don’t see myself ever living again in a place with even a single step to enter. Once you’ve had one stroke the odds of a repeat increase. I like downtown living but not everyone likes to live in a downtown context. The South Side Tower offers urban living in a setting surrounded by residential neighborhoods. The more living spaces we have with accessible entrances the better!

The area will, I believe, continue to urbanize. The Lawrence Group owns the balance of the historic buildings at this major intersection. In time we’ll hopefully see these renovated. They’ve also looked at new construction on the excess parking lot facing both Grand and Gravois. Once all their plans are completed the intersection will have come full circle.

If you’ve not seen these units plan to stop by this coming Saturday & Sunday as you are on your way to (or leaving) the Tower Grove Farmers’ Market or the International Institute’s Festival of Nations in Tower Grove Park. One of us will be there Saturday & Sunday between 1pm-3pm. The bike rack is located at the back off the parking lot. Lock up and come to the West entrance to get buzzed up to see the two furnished displays (5E & 4W).

All five are two bedroom one bath units of 1,114-1,123 sq. ft. Prices range from $166,900 to $199,900 (finishes & views vary). View all 10 of my listings for photos and more detail. The developer’s website at southsidetower.net includes more images as well as floor plans for the units. Eighty years after the building was constructed I think we are again at The Dawn of a New Day for Grand and Gravois.