Almost smart (?)

A guest editorial by Jim Zavist, AIA

My wife and I almost bought a smart fortwo pure this weekend. Or, more accurately, I tried to convince her we should buy one. And, more precisely, her no vote won out.

A little history – last summer I signed up on the waiting list (www.smartusa.com). Last winter, I was able to order what I thought would work. A few weeks ago, I got a call from the local dealer (Plaza) saying they had the vehicle in. After test driving, looking at reviews and much internal discussion, we decided not to buy a smart. For many urban dwellers, the question today is why? Here are a few answers . . .

My wife’s biggest concern can be summed up in one statement, “How do I know that you won’t get killed in that?” The reality is that there is no good answer. Even though it’s incredibly well designed (good handling, great brakes, stability control, multiple air bags), it’s also tiny. It does very well in the crash tests (www.iihs.org), but the results do contain a disclaimer that you can’t beat the laws of physics. I’ve always been a fan of quirky, relatively unsafe vehicles (one Corvair, one Jeep and three VW vans, to name a few that I’ve owned), plus I’ve ridden a bicycle for years in urban traffic, so I’m both aware of the dangers and accepting of the risks. The reality remained is that the smart is a cross between racing bar stool (http://racingbarstool.com) and golf cart, wrapped in plastic panels. It’s a good urban vehicle. It gets scarier as speeds and the number of lanes increase – freeways aren’t smart-friendly places, especially with the current mix of semis, SUV’s and super-duty pickups.

If we lived and/or worked in a more congested part of town, the smart’s tiny size would be more of an attraction. The reality is that we live in a suburban-feeling part of St. Louis, a mile from the Shrewsbury Metrolink station, and we have both a driveway and generous on-street parking available. I work in Clayton, where my employer provides parking in a parking structure. Parking simply is not an issue – either there’s a spot available (99% of the time, there is) or there isn’t – there are no half spots where a smart could squeeze in. And when we go downtown, we usually hop on Metrolink, which, again, at the Shrewsbury station, has plenty of regular-size spaces available. The reality, for us (and many other St. Louisians), is simply that a tiny car offers no parking advantages, unlike places like Victoria, British Columbia, where they have created smaller spaces (http://governing.typepad.com/13thfloor/2008/06/cities-fighting.html#comments) to better utilize limited land in a dense urban area.

The other half of the equation is getting better fuel economy. The smart’s fuel mileage is rated at 33 city and 40 highway. While this compares favorably with the Miata I’m currently driving, it’s not that much better, plus the smart requires premium gas, unlike the regular I’m using now. I’m fortunate, I usually get between 26 and 28 mpg, so I only need to fill up every couple of weeks. Doing the math, the actual savings would be small – 270 miles at 27 mpg in the Miata costs me $39.00 (10 gallons at $3.899 for regular gas), compared to 270 miles at 35 mpg in the smart (7.7 gallons at $4.099 for premium), which would cost me $31.56. Sure, I’d be saving ±$7.50 twice a month, but that would be nowhere near the cost of a new car payment of $250-$300 per month (the Miata’s paid for). Plus, my wife really likes the Prius, so we’re going to wait for one of those – their fuel economy rating of 48 city and 45 highway beats the smart by 10%-40%, plus you get a real car with a real back seat. I know, I know, the Prius costs twice as much ($29,000, for what we want, versus $13,500 for the basic smart) and it would take a million miles of better fuel economy to make up for the higher purchase price, but it’s a much better vehicle for our driving needs. The real question is why, at 2/3 the weight and half the size, doesn’t the smart do better?!

The final issue I need to raise is the transmission in the smart. It only comes with one, an “automated” manual transmission, and it is the vehicle’s biggest Achilles heel. It’s noted in every review and it was the biggest reason I didn’t push harder to buy the car. It shifts slowly and erratically. It may be good in slower stop-and-go-traffic (where you’re stuck in first gear), but it makes driving in typical rush-hour traffic a real pain, as it shifts up and down, poorly. A good CVT (continuously-variable transmission, like Nissan makes) would be a much better answer than this crude device. And given no track record on repairs, I’m not sure if longevity will be part of the smart’s charms. That said, I still view the smart as a great alternative in the right situations. For someone like Steve, who has limited parking available in a loft conversion, being able to fit two vehicles in the space designed for one can be a great asset. It’s also great if you’re fighting for on-street parking in areas where spaces aren’t striped. But until “my” world moves away from the standard 9′ x 18′ (or bigger) parking spots, I’m going to shoot for the best of both worlds, a bigger vehicle and better gas mileage.

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 Reaction:Thanks Jim for sharing your thought process. In places like Seattle where they have ‘pay-n-display’ systems and no defined parking spaces a microcar such as the smart ForTwo will have a greater advantage than here where every space will hold a Chevy Suburban suv. Due to my stroke-induced disability I can no longer operate my scooter so I am car shopping — used car shopping. If I could afford it I’d buy a smart in a flash — it is the perfect urban car.

Wheelchair Access and the Arch Grounds

Last week I showed the image below, the starting point of Market Street and for many a primary walking route to access the Arch grounds.  Well too bad for those of us in wheelchairs, walking with a cane or just pushing a child stroller.

A block South of Market, at Walnut & Memorial, is the same situation.

The place to cross Memorial is at Chestnut —if you know about it and if you are brave enough to do so.  Above I am about to cross Memorial heading West after leaving the Arch grounds. We can see a pedestrian stepping up the unusually high curb.  To the right is the makeshift accessible route.

As you can see we are given a few feet of pavement and zero protection from motorists.  Traffic on Chestnut is one-way Eastbound — toward me in the above image.  I’m not feeling overly accommodated at this point.

The other way in/out of the grounds is at Washington Ave — a good distance out of the way depending on your point of origin or your destination.  Meanwhile civic leaders and politicians are arguing over who has design control of Memorial and discussing how it will literally take an act of congress to do a lid over the highway.

What needs to happen is quite simple — accept the highway as a given.  Realize we have acres of unused plazas already nearby.  Nobody wants to sit out on a lid over the highway next to blank walls of the buildings facing the arch.  Create safe & attractive ADA-compliant  crossings at Chestnut, Market & Walnut.  Populate each intersection with a street vendor selling water, hot dogs, pretzels and such.  Get it done sooner rather than later.  In the meantime get some of those MODot vertical sticks that help visually separate a traffic lane from what they are counting as an accessible route.

Valet Parking Sets Wrong Tone For Downtown

For a good decade now downtown boosters and city leaders have talked about creating a 24/7 downtown. Large doses of valet parking isn’t going to get us there.

I’d argue that too much valet parking sends the wrong message — these are expensive places and unless you can afford a few bucks to avoid walking a block then perhaps you should just stay away.

Now in the last six months or so the valets have been pretty tame compared to a couple of years ago when they’d cone off entire blocks for their use only — adding to the perception of a parking problem downtown.

Those of us that live downtown don’t need valet parking because we are likely to be on foot (or wheelchair). Even those that arrive by car should be encouraged to park & walk. Some in the party like me and unable to walk to far, just drop them off and then find a spot. We need people walking, not just doing the valet thing at the front door.

I personally tend to think of places with valet parking as being too hoity toity for me. Thus I tend to think of other places when contemplating dinner. If others out there have the same tendency then our downtown restaurants that do valet might suffer because their valet service sent the wrong message about their prices.

Image: Signs and cones illegally placed in the street on a slow Sunday afternoon at Lucas Park Grille located on Washington Ave at 13th.

Do We Even Want to Keep the Rams, Can We Afford To

I’ve never been to a football game of any sort. That is saying quite a bit considering I did my undergrad work at the University of Oklahoma where football is seemingly important to everyone. Upon finishing at OU I moved to St Louis in 1990 just in time to catch the city trying to win an expansion team and finally getting the Rams from LA a few years later. I’ve never been to one of the few home games because frankly the sport bores me greatly. Baseball is an interesting game to watch in person, football is not.

Still I recognize the many fans the sport has. I also recognize what major sports can do for a region. Although we must accept the long standing history the baseball Cardinals have in St Louis. The Rams, I’m afraid, do not have the same strong ties to St Louis or the taxpayers, er, the fans.

Out of desperation in the early 1990s we gave the Rams a sweet deal to lure them to St Louis — that over the 30 year lease on the then new dome we’d make sure it stayed in the top 10% in the NFL, reviewed every 10 years. If we don’t keep up, the Rams are free to graze in other pastures.  As the Post-Dispatch reminded us recently, the last review point, at the 20 year marker, is in 2015 — just seven years away.   The P-D also had a rundown of some new stadiums coming online.  They are, in a word, expensive.  Try a billion dollars.

Last time the city, county and state all found a way to fund the dome (even without a team).  But the billion dollar question is this — at what point does keeping the Rams in St Louis get too expensive?  At what point does the cost far outweigh any real or perceived benefit the community gets in return for the investment of public dollars.  A billion dollars can do a lot for a region if leveraged properly.  I’d personally put the billion into a low cost per mile streetcar system and run it through an area prime for new construction with new zoning with some hefty density requirements.  I think  dollar for dollar return would be far greater and longer lasting than with a new football stadium.

The second question I have is this — assuming we think the Rams are worth keeping and that building a new billion dollar stadium is just par for the course —  where should it be built and what do we do with the old dome?  Baseball fits nicely into an urban context but football fans have the tailgate tradition that requires acres of surface parking.  For this reason I don’t think football belongs in a downtown setting, especially given the few times per year they play home games.   Locating a new dome on the East side of the river could be a nice gesture toward the idea that we are all part of the St Louis region.  There is also plenty of land available, transit access and by then a new bridge across the river for fans that can afford tickets and gasoline.

Another option is to place the new dome near downtown — in the old Pruitt-Igoe site.  Tie in a downtown streetcar circulator system running to the new dome and we might just get new development along the line.  The area around the new dome wouldn’t become village probably but the zoning of the area we set the stage for what it would become.  The village might end up being on the way to the dome.

Other options include far flung suburban locations along an interstate highway. Ug, boring.

And finally we have the issue of the abandoned dome.  Do we keep it around as addition space for the convention center?  No, get rid of the big thing so we ca repair that part of downtown — restoring streets lined with buildings oriented to the street.  Currently the convention center and dome acts as a large barrier between downtown and the residential areas to the North.  We need to do what we can to reconnect the city to downtown.

To recap the questions are as follows:  Is it worth a billion dollars to the region to keep the Rams in town?  If yes, where should a new dome be built?  And lastly what do we do with the old dome?

Have Wheelchair, Will Travel

Before my stroke I would walk the 10 or so blocks from my place at 16th & Locust over to City Grocers at 10th & Olive.  While I am able to walk again thanks to a couple of months of physical therapy I can really only handle short distances at a time.  As an example walking to a  seat at the Chase theater after getting dropped off at the Lindell entrance was pushing my limit.

This is why I’m so happy I’ve got an electric wheelchair — it gives me mobility that I thought I wouldn’t have.

Over this past weekend a friend and I  walked across the Eads Bridge.  OK, she walked and I wheelchaired.  What a great bridge — connecting two parts of our region for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and those using light rail.  The bridge make it easy for me to wheelchair all the way to Illinois!

On the Illinois side is a ramp from the top down to the MetroLink level.  A couple of short elevator rides and we we back on the platform for a train to take us back to Missouri.

What I found is my wheelchair tourism is that I can get pretty much anywhere.  Sometimes the direct route is not an option —  such as the above to the Arch Grounds.

A block South at Walnut the situation is just as bad — the crosswalk lines lead directly into a high curb.  I think if I try back by Washington Ave I can get to the grounds but encountering obstacles such as the above can prove frustrating.  At these times the last thing you want to do is travel several blocks out of the way with the hope of stumbling upon an accessible route.

For years now the “lid” project has been discussed.  The latest problem is the who has design review over the area. I say forget the lid and all the useless plaza concepts and just fix the sidewalks to make them accessible sooner rather than later.

Interestingly one of the benefits of being limited by the wheelchair is it forces me to explore my local environment, such as the ‘Meeting of the Waters’ sculpture & fountain by Carl Miles in Aloe Plaza across Market from Union Station.

Union Station is remarkably accessible given that the renovation happened prior to the passage of the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act).  Perhaps the building code of the day mandated a certain level of accessibility?

Given this freedom to explore (on dry days at least) I’m considering my other options.  I’m so close to MetroLink that I could get to places such as the loop or Clayton easily.  I could use a few items from Trader Joe’s and via Metrolink can get close easily & quickly.  The problem is the shopping center is one of those that assumes everyone drives a private automobile.  Although a sidewalk runs along Eager it doesn’t connect to the shops (at least to my recollection).  Ditto for crossing Brentwood and making it to Whole Foods.

The Central West End is certainly an option too.  As soon as I figure out how to get on & off the bus with a wheelchair that will give me many more options.  I think I need to get to Loughborough Commons in the chair so I can evaluate their after the fact accessible route.

While you might see people in wheelchairs and feel sorry for us don’t.  To me the wheelchair represents freedom and mobility.  Without the chair I’d be stuck at home.