Soulard Residents’ Statement on Mardi Gras

Last night some residents of the Soulard neighborhood located south of downtown made the following statement at a Mardi Gras forum:

Introduction:

A group of concerned long time Soulard residents have gotten together and formed an ad hoc committee to address the problems associated with Mardi Gras. Our general feeling is that Mardi Gras, Inc. has over promoted the event to the point that it has become dangerous and destructive to our residential neighborhood.

The following is a basic statement concerning our position and supportive points that Mardi Gras, Inc. and the people at City Hall need to address before the 2007 event takes place.

Statement:

Mardi Gras has outgrown Soulard, our residential neighborhood, and must move to another location.

1. Mardi Gras is unsafe. Mardi Gras, Inc. over promotes the event which is held in our residential neighborhood. There are too many visitors who exhibit drunken, aggressive, and dangerous behavior. The crowd is getting younger and drunker. There is unsafe crowding. There is excessive demand on and use of the city’s police force. There is residual broken glass and trash. There is public urination.

2. Mardi Gras causes the destruction of private property. The event is over promoted, too large, and an open invitation far and wide for attendees to come to Soulard. There is constant and extreme destruction to our homes, yards and businesses.

3. Mardi Gras does not benefit the Soulard neighborhood. It puts money into the pockets of a select few and the residents are left to deal with the repercussions of this event, leading up to it, on the day of the event and throughout the year.

4. Mardi Gras is branding Soulard as a “year-round party place.” It is detracting from the interests of Soulard as a residential neighborhood noted for its historic architecture and charm. It threatens Soulard’s viability and the continued ability to attract and keep families and other potential residents and businesses to the area to ensure the legacy of a stable and diverse urban neighborhood.

Not much to disagree with here. The Soulard residents have done an excellent job of summarizing their views. Let’s look at each point.

Safety:

Yes, each year it appears the group is younger and drunker. I don’t have a problem with younger but the drunker part is an issue. A good beer buzz is one thing but falling down drunk is quite another. Squeezing many people into a small area and then an increasing number drunk it a bad overall formula. The potential of a small scale riot is quite feasible.

Destruction of Property:

With drunks comes property destruction. The neighborhood is fragile with many windows at the street. Old fences and other property is in close proximity to being damaged.

Benefit:

This is a tough one. I think, to a degree, the residents have benefited from Mardi Gras in that it has helped increase property values from the area being considered a hot spot. But, otherwise I see no direct benefit to local residents. The bars & restaurants do a good business but do other local businesses benefit?

The Big Picture:

Gaslight Square went downhill partly due to be overdone. The focus became too much on entertainment and partying. Few want to live in the middle of an entertainment district. I think it is a fair concern for the residents to raise that Soulard may be branded as a party place. If so, it could potentially lose its appeal as a nice neighborhood with local restaurants and bars. Crossing the line from neighborhood to entertainment district is not something we want to cross.

I’m happy to see such a rational discussion of the points and hopefully something can be determined so that we have a Mardi Gras in some form for years to come. However, I just can’t imagine it feeling right on Market in front of the post office.

– Steve

CNU’s Norquist uses St. Aloysius in Presentation on Urbanism

This evening, at the APA Workshop in Kirkwood, CNU President and CEO John Norquist used a picture of St. Aloysius as a good example of how a building can terminate a vista. He had pulled the image from my site resulting from a Google search.

By a stroke of luck Norquist sat next to me on the bus trip from Kirkwood to New Town at St. Charles. On the bus ride out and back we had a chance to talk about New Urbanism, St. Louis, Milwaukee (where he served as Mayor), parking, highway construction and, one of my favorite topics, the Apple Macintosh.

Speaking with Norquist on the bus and as we walked around New Town I found him to be someone private and reserved. As we hit it off he would make observations to me about things he saw. For example, across from the sales center was a building along an alley that lacked windows on the alley side, a no-no in New Urban terms. He seemed pleased to find something to tease planner Andres Duany about. New Town’s Tim Busse acknowledged they have made a few mistakes but have quickly learned from. Norquist was clearly impressed by what he saw. I will have a full review of New Town in April.

Norquist’s opening presentation to the workshop was very inspiring, funny and spot-on. He changed from a tall but quiet man to a very outspoken speaker. He took shots at our current foreign policy as well as clearly showing the distinctions between the old sprawl patterns of old vs. the new patterns of urbanism.

Norquist related a story of a street in Milwaukee where a developer built a horrible little strip center set back from the street just after he was elected Mayor. He knew the developer and asked him why he built the building so far back from the street. The developers answer? It was what his city’s code required. From that moment he set out to change his city’s zoning to allow for urbanism.

I was so impressed by his presentation that I bought his book, The Wealth of Cities: Revitalizing the Centers of American Life. After his presentation I informed Norquist that St. Aloysius will be razed, he was shocked and miffed. “Tell them I used it in my presentation.”

– Steve

Some Soulard Residents Want to Cancel Mardi Gras 2007

Today I got an email about a meeting to be held tomorrow in Soulard concerning next years’ Mardi Gras. Some want it canceled!

Soulard Residents Form Ad Hoc Committee
Will Present Statement at Upcoming Mardi Gras Forum

A group of long-time Soulard residents have formed an ad hoc committee to address neighborhood concerns about Mardi Gras with the hope of cancelling the 2007 event.

The group will read a statement at Mardi Gras Inc.’s annual Mardi Gras Forum to be held on Thursday, March 30th, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. The forum will be held in the Boilermaker’s Union Hall at 1547 South Broadway. [Enter through the back door, behind the hall, off the alley/parking lot area next to Quizno’s.

The group came together and formed the committee when several residents, fearful for their safety and that of their neighbors, outraged at the destruction of their private property, and discouraged by the general disrespect of the neighborhood by Mardi Gras planners and attendees, decided it was time to join together and speak out against the event. They believe that Mardi Gras has increasingly become an overly promoted, dangerous and out-of-hand event that the current event promoter, Mardi Gras, Inc., cannot or is unwilling to adequately oversee and one in which the police force unwittingly, is hard-pressed to manage and contain.

Over the past weeks, the committee has contacted a larger group of concerned neighborhood citizens who will be present at the Forum and will stand together with committee members, united in their position to permanently remove Mardi Gras from the historic Soulard neighborhood.

WHAT: Mardi Gras Inc.’s Mardi Gras Forum
WHEN: Thursday, March 30, 2006; 7:00 p.m.
WHERE: Boilermaker’s Union Hall at 1547 South Broadway in Soulard
Entrance from the alley/parking lot at the rear of the building, [next to Quizno’s]

I enjoy Mardi Gras but will be the first to admit that it is something I go to, it doesn’t come to me and my home. I cannot attend the meeting but I expect to get a copy of the statement to publish here.

– Steve

Vinyl Windows & Cornice Trim Do Not “Improve” Our Architecture

I was furious Monday evening. The City’s Preservation Board nearly voted to allow a home owner to keep the ugly & inappropriate vinyl windows he installed in a home located in a local historic district without the required building permit. I say nearly because it took some strong arguing from members Richard Callow and Anthony Robinson to convince Melanie Fathman to vote to require the replacement. Not surprising was that Mary ‘One’ Johnson and Luis Porrello voted to allow the owner to keep the windows in place.

This case involved an owner that moved to the city from University City. He indicated the old cornice was rotted and the windows were old and original. The cornice had a wonderful large dentil block and a nice wide soffit. The board behind the dentils was apparently rotten so the owner decides to rip it all down and put up a vinyl wrapped cornice instead. For dentils he was going to apply some vinyl ones that were in no way reminiscent of the originals.

The vinyl windows, like all vinyl windows, do not look like a wood window. I want to repeat that: No vinyl window looks like a wood window does. Period.

You may get the same pattern of six “lites” over one “lite” but that is about as close as you can get. The remaining details are way off due to the materials and how they are put together. A vinyl window has much thinner rails on the sash. The window is also considerably thinner than a wood window which means the plane of the glass is virtually that of the frame. The muntin dividers (aka grills) in vinyl windows are either the interior snap-in type or the ones that go between the glass. Again, this gives a very flat look. The vinyl wrap applied over the original brick wood mold in the openings also looses considerable detail in the process. And, vinyl windows even if custom fitted still end up reducing the overall opening. Only on rare occasions have I seen vinyl windows installed in one of our old buildings that looks halfway decent.

Part of the debate at the Preservation Board centered around the window installation contractors that install windows. In this case I think the owner did this to himself but often it is the fault of the contractors. The owner assumes the professional window installer is going to get a permit, if necessary, and follow all codes including any historic codes. Sorry folks, most often that is not the case. It is the owner’s responsibility to verify that all codes are being followed.

If you are not sure if you need a permit or, if you are in a historic district that requires exterior changes to be reviewed by the neighborhood and/or Preservation board, then you need to make phone call or two before you start your work. Don’t blame your contractor, especially if they are from the county.

In many cases if the home owner had contacted either the neighborhood association or the city’s building division they could have easily determined the requirements and avoided a situation of having installed windows that must now be removed. Appropriate wood windows are far more costly than vinyl windows. No doubt about it. That is why I still have original wood windows with metal storms on my place.

The Preservation Board all agreed to tell the homeowner he must rebuild the cornice in wood —- no vinyl wrapped ill-proportioned knock off. But when it came to the windows some members were content with requiring the removal of the vinyl wrap but leaving the windows. First, this shows a lack of understanding of window installation. Had they permitted the windows to be left but removing the trim wrap we would have seen gaps where the windows were slightly different sizes from the openings. It is possible to install vinyl windows into an original wood opening but it has to be planned from the start. If they had voted to require just the wrap removal it would have ended up looking worse, which would be hard to do.

Another issue I have with vinyl windows is the color — bright white. Boy do these stick out like a sore thumb. White trim is a very post WWII or early colonial thing, mostly inappropriate for St. Louis’ architecture. Our wood windows often had dark green window sashes with the window trim in another color. White lead paint became popular in the 1930s but before that white paint was a rarity in St. Louis. New wood windows come in some great colors including some nice tans & greens as well as black. When you have dark masonry building a bright white window simply creates way too much contrast. With a cheap vinyl window in white you are drawing attention to something better off not noticed. So please folks, save the white windows (wood or vinyl) for the colonial boxes in the suburbs.

What really got me going during the meeting was Mary ‘One’ Johnson’s comments how this would have been avoided if the neighborhood had informed the owner what could and couldn’t be done prior to any work starting. Ms. Johnson, a fellow REALTOR®, expects neighborhood associations to monitor property tax records to see if any home in their area has sold so that they can make sure owner doesn’t screw up the house. WTF? As REALTORS® we have pretty good access to tax records, much better than the general public. However, it would still be a time consuming process to look up each and every property in a neighborhood to see if it has changed hands. And how often is enough? Every month? Every week? Every day? Even just tracking those properties that are for sale could be a daunting task for any volunteer neighborhood association to take on.

Others on the PB asked if it was not the responsibility of the real estate agents. Some thought the title work should indicate such things. Well, sorry, it does not. And when we see the title work it is during the closing of the sale, not prior. But, I do think agents representing a buyer should help direct their clients to information on historic districts and building permits if they have reason to believe the buyer will be making some changes.

But the responsibility is really with the owner, not the contractors, neighbors or real estate agents. The owner is responsible for their own home.

If you want a really low maintenance home buy something newer. If you want a wonderful historic home with relatively low maintenance make sure you don’t paint the brick, do a great job restoring & painting the wood trim and get really good clad wood windows. If that is too much to deal with I suggest renting or buying a condo. Just don’t come into my city thinking bright white vinyl windows is an improvement.

– Steve

CNU’s John Norquist To Speak at APA Workshop

John Norquist, former Mayor of Milwaukee and currently President & CEO of the Congress for the New Urbanism, will be in the St. Louis region on Thursday March 30th. Norquist will participate in a tour of New Town at St. Charles as well as speak at an evening workshop:

Mobile Workshop
The mobile workshop features a tour of New Town, the region’s largest new urbanist development. Plenary speaker John Norquist will join a tour featuring speakers from the City of St. Charles, Whittaker Homes and the Missouri Department of Conservation. Participants meet at Powder Valley and travel by bus to New Town.

Planning Workshop
The evening begins with a reception and presentation of the 2006 St. Louis Metro Section Planning Awards. Encouraging and recognizing excellence in planning has been an important component of the American Planning Association since its inception. Categories for nomination are Outstanding Planning Awards for a Plan, for a Project, Program or Tool, for a Community Initiative, for a Student Project and for Implementation, the Dwight F. Davis Award for a Citizen Planner, and Distinguished Leadership Awards for a Professional Planner and for an Elected Official The plenary session features John Norquist. President and C.E.O., Congress for the New Urbanism, addressing the challenges of incorporating New Urbanist concepts in city and regional planning. Norquist led the revision of Milwaukee’s zoning code and reoriented development around walkable streets and public amenities such as the city’s 3.1-mile Riverwalk during his tenure as Mayor from 1988 to 2003.

Workshop sessions follow three tracks: New Urbanism, Legal Issues and Innovative Practices. Six workshop sessions provide useful information and thoughtful discussion to assist in enhancing and developing successful St. Louis Region communities. Join fellow citizen and professional planners at the 2006 Planning Workshop to work toward improving the quality of our communities!

For additional information on place, date, time, content and cost please download the 2006 St. Louis APA Planning Workshop Brochure.

More information from the St. Louis APA here. Hopefully this will inspire me to finish a post on New Town.

[UPDATE 3/29/06 – 9am, corrected that Norquist was mayor of Milwaukee, not Minneapolis. ]

– Steve