New Blog Focuses on City’s 15th Ward

A new blog called 15thwardstl.org has been started by local architect Steve Wilke-Shapiro, a resident of the 15th Ward. The blog’s subheading gives a good clue as to the focus: Politics, development, and civic life in St. Louis’ 15th ward.

Wilke-Shapiro had this to say about the blog:

“While inspired by my experience as part of the McDonald’s fight, I don’t intend for it to be a diatribe against Jennifer Florida. There are plenty of issues and opportunities in the 15th not directly related to her.”

That seems fair. I think he will bring some much needed attention and focus to all aspects of his ward. In the years I’ve known him he has always been extremely level-headed, thoughtful and passionate about the city. He has a few posts in place and promises many more from a growing list of topics.

– Steve

MoDOT Seeks to Permanently Close Thurman Ave.

I’ve been ranting about how highways have dissected our city’s street gird and really disrupted life for decades. But I thought it was over, after all, the highways have been built through the city for decades now. I was wrong, enter MoDOT.

I learned at last night’s Preservation Board that MoDOT wants to remove the I-44 bridge over Thurman Avenue connecting Shaw on the south to what was McRee Town (now Botanical Heights) on the north (map). The road under the highway has been closed to vehicular traffic for probably a good 20 years but pedestrians and cyclists could still pass under the highway.

Thurman Ave. was closed presumably to cut down on crime with both sides of the highway having their fare share of issues over the years. But we’ve leveled the bulk of the area to the north for new construction and on the south new homes will soon be going up on vacant lots.

We should be discussing reopening Thurman Ave., not closing it. But, MoDOT doesn’t like the expense of maintaining the bridge. Their solution? Remove the bridge and completely in-fill the gap. If successful, that leaves Tower Grove & 39th as the two means of crossing the highway in this area while avoiding major roads. The distance between 39th and Tower Grove Ave is just over a half mile — too great a distance to expect to walk around.

Thurman Ave needs to stay open. The city should remove the barricades and reopen the street to vehicular traffic immediately. Send MoDOT a message — you can’t keep messing up our city by cutting off our access!

– Steve

Eminent Domain: Where Do We Go From Here?

The phrase ‘Eminent Domain’ has become as evil a phrase in the city as ‘Urban Renewal’, maybe more. I’ve yet to take a strong position on this debate so it is time I correct that. Click here to read a prior post on eminent domain from October 2005.

I’m going to start by putting on my best political top hat, ride the fence, and state the obvious:

Eminent Domain is a very useful tool that does have its place.

Eminent Domain has been increasingly abused, to a point beyond excessive.

Both sides of the debate on Eminent Domain need to step back and look for common ground.

Nobody wins as long as this debate continues.

The above are pretty much “safe” positions for one to take. In other words, no real substance. But I’m a substance kinda guy so here it goes.

No eminent domain for a Wal-Mart!!! Nor for any other “big box” store, chain or local. Don’t even think about taking someone’s personal home.

On the other side of the coin if we, as a city, through a quality urban planning process decide we need a new park, school or library then yes, I can see the use of eminent domain — even possibly taking someone’s personal residence. But I’d want to see hard evidence of two things, 1) the need does exist and 2) all other possible sites do not work.

Everything else is a very subjective quality issue for me. Take, for example, the recent issue in Richmond Heights of the area known as Hadley Township. I’ll be the first to admit that I probably wouldn’t be as upset about the use of eminent domain had the city selected the truly urban proposal from Conrad Properties. Some may claim I’m inconsistent or a hypocrite but let me elaborate.

Many things can be accomplished through good zoning. Dense & walkable neighborhoods can be created where suburban sprawl once existed. Increased density around a transit stop is, in my view, in the public good and therefore at least worthy of consideration for the use of eminent domain. Zoning in smart cities offers developers incentives as trade off for things in the public interest. Other times the incentives become mandates. So, if a developer is seeking eminent domain for an area I think they’ve got to earn it. This means to me minimum densities, little to no surface parking, 2-story minimum building heights (more depending upon circumstances), relationship with the sidewalk, bike parking, mixed uses and so on.

None of the requirements should be punitive to the developer but instead offer rewards for creating good urban design. This might mean the developer gets to build a floor or two higher than normally allowed or gets reduced parking requirements. By designing the zoning in such a way as to require good urban in-fill as a condition for the use of eminent domain then I can possibly be convinced a private development is in the best interests of the public.

A typical sprawl center, like Loughborough Commons now under construction, is not nor will it ever be in the public good to the point it justified the use (or threat of use) to take those people’s homes. It was wrong. More than enough land existed to create the horrible shopping center.

I think to some developers the project just is not complete unless they take away someone else’s property. If they’ve got 1 acre they want 2, if they have 6 they want 8. You don’t have to have an entire city block to build new construction! If you have a lot with 100 feet of frontage by 125 foot deep design a building to fit that parcel, don’t complain the guy next door won’t sell his vacant 50 foot wide lot. I think much of our areas are stagnant because developers waste precious time trying to find ways to assemble increasingly larger and larger parcels for overly complicated projects. In the meantime years go by and nothing is built. If you’ve got more than 25 feet of width you can construct a new building. Deal with it. Build on it or sell it to someone that will.

However, maybe I can be in a position at some point to take the as-yet-built McDonald’s on Grand and raze it for something urban? That might be the trick, if you build low-density suburban crap in the city you leave yourself wide open for eminent domain for a project achieving certain set criteria.

Eminent domain for road building should be a thing of the past, at least in established areas. We’ve got all the roads we need. Well, with a slight exception — I want back many of the streets and alleys that have been vacated over the years. Eminent domain to reclaim previously public streets and alleys should stick around. I should also separate out roads from highways. Building a new road to connect the street grid together is probably a good thing. Taking property for more highways, no so good.

And yes, on my site I am judge and jury. I’m making highly subjective value judgments. I know that, not necessary to point it out. Our zoning codes are entirely subjective value judgments — ours just happen to be based on what bureaucrats & officials thought in the late 1940s. Newly revised zoning codes would not say, “call Steve Patterson to find out the answer.” No, new zoning codes can incorporate judgments related to supporting our old urbanism as well as thinking from new urbanism. Let’s at least get to the point where we are debating the finer points of a new zoning code. Then, and probably only then, can we make any rational decisions around the use of eminent domain.

– Steve

Thoughts on Civil Rights & Gay Pride

This weekend is the big Pride celebration in St. Louis. Two days of festivities in Tower Grove park along with a parade down Grand beginning at noon on Sunday. I’ll probably go, I always do.

I “came out” as we say back when I was just 16 years old. If you are trying to do the math that would have been back in 1983. AIDS was just becoming an issue, although it would be two years later before President Reagan would publicly say “AIDS.”

I became somewhat of an activist in college as a co-chair of the University of Oklahoma Gay-Lesbian Alliance. We, as a group, participated in Oklahoma City’s first ever gay pride parade in 1988. The parade, thankfully, went off without any trouble as was feared by many.

I recall one weekend in the early 90’s where I was in Kansas City for their pride weekend and I returned to St. Louis to catch the parade in St. Louis — down Euclid and ending in Forest Park at the time.

1993 was the best year for me, the March on Washington. Some said we were a million strong. It seemed like it, everywhere you turned in Washington D.C. was someone gay or lesbian. At the time we were not as inclusive as to include those who are bisexual or transgendered. I’m sure they were there.

At the time the big issue was gays in the military, like somehow that was a new thing. 1993 was the year we got the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Policy” that is still in effect.

My best memory of the entire event was my college friend Richard and I hearing the fabulous Eartha Kitt on the load speaker. By the time we made it across the mall to the stage she was done with her performance.

When I came out at 16 my big fears were getting beaten up (or killed) and AIDS. I’ve avoided both, thankfully. I never imagined, at the time, discussions of gays serving in the military, civil unions, and marriage. Although still hostile, the world is certainly a better place today with respect to gay rights.

Happy Pride weekend everyone!

– Steve

Carnahan School Gets New Sign, Remains Suburban

This summer Carnahan Middle School is transforming into the Carnahan High School of the Future. At least the new sign being erected says it is the future of high schools. While I treasure our classic early 20th Century Ittner-designed schools I’m not so crazy about this 2003 version. It looks like any suburban school. The problem is, it is located at Broadway & Gasconade (map)— hardly suburbia.

The new sign being constructed is the first clue to passersby this is a school. Sure, by the looks, they might assume as much. But I don’t believe it has ever had a sign at the street. In fact, the whole places tends to ignore the street altogether. That is what rubs me the wrong way. Buildings, especially civic buildings, should embrace and celebrate the public street.

This is the view presented to Broadway, one of the oldest routes in our region and along a major bus route. Sadly, an old streetcar storage & maintenance building was razed to construct this school. The old building, even though built for purely utilitarian means, did a wonderful job of relating to the street.

The current school is set back far from the street, much as you’d expect in places like Ballwin or St. Peters. The public sidewalk does run the length of Broadway and it is used often, including during the time I was taking pictures today. From the public sidewalk is another sidewalk which will eventually lead you to the building entrance. However, if you are standing at the intersection of these two sidewalks you cannot see the building’s entrance. With rare exception, a building’s entrance should be in close proximity to and visible from the primary public street.

The lush green lawn does little to benefit the urban streetscape along Broadway. With a nice small park to the immediate south the area did not need more open space. What it needed but didn’t get, is a building to reinforce the public realm of Broadway.

Access to the entrance is assumed by car. You enter from Gasconade St. —- oh wait —- make that the former Gasconade St. since it was vacated and blocked off on the west end. The site, just a hair over 6 acres, has been poorly utilized. Bordered on three sides by public streets (now two public and one private), the building doesn’t relate to any of them.

Unless hidden somewhere, the school does not have any bike racks for students, parents, teachers or staff to use.

One of the more common urban theories, popularized by the late Jane Jacobs, is the more eyes you had watching a street the safer it was. Thus, having multiple entrances immediately off a public street would create many people watching your actions. School age kids, in those times, may have tried to get away with wrong-doings but it is harder to succeed in such acts when being watched by many.

Since opening Carnahan Middle School, named after Gov. Mel Carnahan killed in an October 2001 plane crash, has been problematic since day one. Good urban design can not turn all students into well behaved kids but bad urban design can assuredly support bad behavior.

The solution?

More than a new sign!

The building, just a few years old, probably should be razed as it does such a poor job of fitting into the city. However, I think it could mostly be retained as part of a wing off a new 2-3 story structure built along Broadway. This would allow for a proper entrance along Broadway where parents and buses could use the more than ample on-street parking spaces. I’d throw in a few bike racks along the public right of way so that people coming to the facility, perhaps even for a community meeting, will have a place to secure their bikes. This vision of mine, of course, will likely never happen.

Our schools need a lot of help. As we invest in new schools we need to stop and think about how that school relates to the general public. Great civic buildings from past generations are special for their design and detailing but also their connection to the street and subsequently to the adjacent neighborhood.

– Steve