Washington Ave; New ADA Ramp Creates Trip Hazard

Pedestrians walking down Washington Ave heading to Joe Edwards’ new blowing bowling alley, Flamingo Bowl, should be mindful of a trip hazard created by a neighboring property.

Heading East on Washington toward the new bowling alley we see the wonderfully remodeled former Days Inn, now residential apartments. It has been great seeing the transformation of this structure. They even filled in the former automobile drive to the courtyard space — now that is real progress for pedestrians. But the ramp you see ahead presents an issue.

The landing juts out from the narrower ramp. Yes, it is a minor thing but generally big things are not trip hazards. Small things, in particular those that blend with the sidewalk, cause people to fall. In general, the ramp and landing are created the same width so you don’t have this little protrusion at th bottom.
Presumably the city would share in any injury claims as they approved the design and installation of this ramp in the public right of way.

Gateway Mall Announcement in January ’08

Yesterday’s “town hall” meeting at the Downtown Partnership regarding management of the CID (Community Improvement District) produced little new information, other than the fact than the city will be unveiling the final Gateway Mall plan next month.

You will recall that earlier this year, prior to a meeting where citizens were asked to provide feedback on the draft, the city announced final plans for the two-block Sculpture Garden between 9th and 11th (see prior post). That leaves Kiener Plaza/May Amphitheatre, “Twain”, and the blocks from Tucker West to 20th.

Now living only a few blocks away, I can see the failure even stronger. Public space needs to feel like it is surrounded by a vibrant city. The South wall of the Gateway Mall, at 16th at least, is horribly bland. Union Station, down at 18th, is at least a stunning work of architecture. Sometimes, on my walks, I’ll take 16th street to Market —- of course 16th between Olive and Market hasn’t been a street in decades — it was closed long ago during urban renewal.

Our downtown is very linear, very East-West. The focus being Washington Ave. By the time you make it to the too-wide Olive Blvd the synergy has run out. I don’t know that anything can sustain interest in Gateway Mall without appearing too Disneyland. No matter what, the “walls” of this open space are largely lifeless and will remain as such.

Decades ago this area was cleared of the slummy properties that were viewed as unseemly by our elite and to provide some relief from the hustle & bustle of the city. The 500,000 residents we lost (pushed away?) in the last half century took the bustle with them. Will a new Gateway Mall plan bring the hustle back to this section of St. Louis?

Congress Wake Up & Let Farmers Grow Industrial Hemp!

One of the most green products in the world, able to be fabricated into many diverse products, is banned in only one industrial nation — the United States. Sure, we can import product made from Hemp such as all manner of clothing, bedding, ropes, paper, and so on, but our farmers cannot grow this product as the feds fear the farmers or others might grow its hallucinogenic cousin, pot.

Both industrial hemp and pot are members of the cannabis family, although the latter has a mind-altering impact when injested that the former does not. Under this logic we need to ban gardeners from planning the lovely poppy plant and stop the sale of poppy-seed bagels at St. Louis Bread Co because some folks use a cousin of those to manufacture heroin. Unlike a pretty flower or a damn fine bagel variety, industrial hemp has so many uses in society. Similarly, pot and heroin are not even in the same league.

I’ve smoked pot all of one time — and yes I inhaled (see post). It still smells funny to me. So while I have little desire to run out and buy pot I think we need to let up. I say we just legalize it — that will certainly remove allure to do something illegal. It will also remove the stigma of getting caught as well as pull the rug out from under the street value. But, this post is not about pot, it is about industrial hemp.

More so than a quick toke I want to buy clothing made from hemp. It’s available, but boy is it pricey. How does $40 for a t-shirt sound? Some of it is borderline reasonable but a far cry from being affordable. If the US were growing industrial hemp the raw materials would be much more affordable — manufacturers could continue to pay their workers decent wages and still sell at a profit, even when the retail price drops. Basic supply and demand at work. The problem is the demand is there but the feds have forced a market shortage on the supply side.

Recently farmers in North Dakota sued the federal government for the right to grow industrial hemp.  The judge, however, said they need to take it up with congress.  From a Reuters story:

“Obviously we are disappointed with the decision,” says Eric Steenstra, President of Vote Hemp, a grassroots group working to bring industrial hemp farming back to the U.S. “The Court’s decision shows it understands that the established and growing market for industrial hemp would be beneficial for North Dakota farmers to supply. Yet the decision overlooks Congress’s original intent – and the fact that farmers continued to grow hemp in the U.S.for twenty years after marijuana was banned. If the plaintiffs decide to appeal the case, we would wholeheartedly support that effort. We are not giving up and will take this decision to Washington, DC to prompt action by Congress on HR 1009, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007, which would clarify a state’s right to grow the crop,” adds Steenstra.

If you share my concerns, contact your U.S. Representative, and your U.S. Senators, to ask them to support industrial hemp farming.  All those candidates for President and all the state-level folks need to be asked about positions on industrial hemp as well.  It is about time we once again grew one of the products that helped get this country through WWII.

The Disappearing Urban Billboard

I’ve talked at length before about signs and billboards (here and here). These days it is all about the large-scale vinyl banner but in earlier times what wasn’t painted on the side of a building was set on the roof.  I had never given these old billboards much thought, until recently.

Above is the Farmers and Merchants building in February of 2006 with an advertisement for the phone book, of all things. To preservation purists the billboard is an eyesore. The platform in front of the billboard masks the decorative elements along the parapet of the building and adds a cluttered look, right?

Above, in November 2007, the billboard is gone but the framework remains — for now. Soon the framework will be off to a metal recycler. Standing in the beautifully renovated South Side National Bank, now condos, with a representative from The Lawrence Group I couldn’t help feel a sudden loss when he indicated it was going away. “No!” I cried out.

I can’t fault the Lawrence Group, well, not too much.  They own the building and want to do a new roof, hard to argue with that logic.  I know if they wanted to install such a billboard folks would be upset.  This, of course, got me wondering if I’d be one of those objecting to a large display of commercialism if this same billboard were proposed today.

Near my office, on South Kingshighway, is another rooftop billboard above the yummy Lily’s restaurant. This helps answer my question — I think I’d be able to support having such billboards along commercial streets.  I’d be cautious about light pollution — excess light cast into nearby windows from the billboard.  But in general, I rather like it.
Even though I don’t always like the message on the billboard, I like the presence.  It adds a nice touch of urban messiness to the street.  I like the shadows they cast.  I like the details of the metal structure and the supports where the structure touches the roof or exterior masonry walls.  I don’t want St. Louis to become Times Square or Las Vegas but such are part of our culture.

Above is from a scene in the classic 1992 film, Strictly Ballroom, with Scott and Fran dancing on the roof amongst the laundry and a Coke billboard.  OK, that was based in Australia — see how universal the billboard truly is.  We have Billboard magazine and I’m sure we’ve all seen a sitcom or two with folks up on a billboard trying to change the message.

I like urban clutter, but not just any clutter.  I don’t like tons of little (or big) vinyl banners affixed to the face of buildings.   I’m also not a fan of the big billboard on a pole — just sticking up in the air, often next to the highway.  But there is something about the rooftop billboard that I find endearing.

As a matter of public policy, I wouldn’t go so far as to prevent an owner from removing a billboard from their building but I could also see circumstances where not only might such a sign be welcomed, but actually encouraged.  I could imagine allowing property owners along major streets to erect billboards as part of a development project — as an incentive for doing a more urban project.  For example, say Walgreens were to renovate an existing urban building (aka up to sidewalk, parking on-street/behind) and then lease the 2nd floor apartments.  I’d let them have a billboard on the roof for that.

I’d want it to be at least on a two-story building.  Again, issues of light pollution would need to be addressed.  Not Times Square, just enough to upset the anti-clutter folks.

St. Louis Buys 2nd Leadership Award, Mayor and Planner Get London Trip to Accept

Last night Mayor Francis Slay and Planning Director Rollin Stanley were in London representing the city at the World Leadership Awards. St. Louis was a finalist in the area of housing. Yesterday the Mayor’s blog noted this much. They also had a little note at the end:

Note to Editors: The World Leadership Forum (WLF) is a not-for-profit organization which promotes leadership internationally — especially in the areas of science, technology, education, communication and the arts — by spotlighting the work of exceptional leaders and achievers in a host of disciplines.

See, by adding a note at the end it gives the group some legitimacy. From where I see it, this organization is all about award shows and by paying money to “win” an award it is self funded. Sure, they have no entry fees but they notify the short list of people later and they must fork over some cash to offset costs. The price tag last year was £3,000 ($5,900).

So you are asking yourself, how can I be so sure this is all rigged? Well, I cannot prove anything. First, it is the price tag which raises a big red flag. World leaders seldom have to pay to be recognized as such. References to this have been removed from their website. Last year their site indicated:

Cities reaching the shortlists (from two four in each category) will be required to pay a fee of £3,000 to cover the presentation and judging costs (venue hire, audiovisual equipment, crew, catering, judges travel expenses etc.), as well as the cost of a table at the award ceremony (the table seats up to ten guests and includes complimentary cocktails, dinner, wine programs etc.).

Cities which fail to pay the fee within 30 days of the invoice date will be disqualified from the awards.

Cities that do not reach the shortlists will not be charged any fees.

Second, the sponsoring organization refuses to disclose how many entries are received in each category. Was it just the two-four on the shortlist or was it 10 or more. They indicate they refuse to disclose the entries not shortlisted because they don’t want to embarrass those cities. Well, they don’t want to disclose the number of entries as it would likely prove embarrassing to the winners. Furthermore, while claiming to promote leadership and give awards to cities so that it might help others, they don’t publish the winning entries.

Speaking of winners, The City of Las Vegas was the big winner last night. The unsustainable city in Nevada got three awards for Transport, Leisure & Sport as well as the American City of the Year. Yes, Las Vegas the American City of the Year! That has to tell you something!

We were a finalist against City of Ahmedabad, the capital city of Gujarat, India. Their submission was called Housing for the Poor.
Our submission? The title was, “Vacancy to Vibrancy.” Did we win? Uh, yeah. You don’t think we are going to send the Mayor and a key staff person to London if we weren’t going to win? (Wink, wink).

Last year the St. Louis PR spin machine was in full swing using words like “nominated” — as if someone suggested we deserved an award. They also said things like ‘out of 400 entries’ to imply it was a crowded contest. In actuality, it turned out to be the organization sent mailers out to over 400 cities asking them to submit entries. You can read last year’s post here and review last year’s entry here. I’ve already sent over my request for the latest entry via the Missouri Sunshine Law regarding open records.