Preservation Board to Orchard: Move Those Meters!

The Preservation Board had many agenda items on their plate last night. The following is a run down of each item and how they voted. If you want to know about the Lafayette Square gas meter issue scroll down, it is the last item.

The first item up for review was approval of an encroachment on the public right of way for a sculpture along the riverfront (agenda item A). The sculpture titled, The Captains’ Return, depicts the “arrival of Captains Lewis and Clark and their dog Searnan, at the St. Louis Levee after the completion of the ‘Corps of Discovery’ expedition of 1804-1806. The idea is to have the sculpture installed by September 23, the date in which Lewis & Clark returned from their expedition.

Two guys off on a journey with their dog, how very Brokeback Mountain. The Preservation Board unanimously approved the temporary encroachment with conditions as noted in the agenda.

Next up was an encroachment at 2028 Lafayette Avenue, a new gazebo/pergola in Lafayette Park. This structure would be attached to the west side of the Park House and visible from Lafayette near Mississippi. From the staff report:

Staff has worked with the designer of the proejct to make the pergola smaller in scale and more compatible with the adjacent historic Park House. The columns on the pergola are still too neo-classical and should be simplified, and the cupola on the roof is still too tall and ornate for the period.

The Preservation Board approved the encroachment with conditions as noted in the agenda.

In an attempt to dress up one of our many new parking garages a piece of public art, entitled Walking Figure, is proposed for the corner of Olive & 7th. The sculpture is owned by the Gateway Foundation. Rollin Stanley testified about how great our sidewalks are but that we need more public sculpture — I agree on both accounts. He also said the sculpture is not liked by all, but that is what makes good public art. Anything to take your eye off the wheel cover motif on the parkign garage is a good thing in my book! The Preservation Board approved the encroachment

A very vocal resident spoke passionately against this sculpture, saying “this is a scheme, who is getting the tax write-off?” He indicated this sculpture has been shopped around quite a bit with the last location where the sculpture was placed was in Europe, but “nobody wants it.” Speaking of the artist, this resident said “he can’t draw, he can’t sculpt.” The Preservation Board approved the public encroachment by a vote of 4-2.

The St. Louis Zoo is proposing a plaza & prominent sculpture (Animals Always) at the corner of Wells and Concourse Drive (basically the entrance from Hampton). HNTB is the engineering firm on the project. This will not be a new pedestrian entrance to the zoo so I am a little confused who will actually use the plaza. The sculpture looks pretty cool, it is made of core-ten steel which will intentionally rust. PB member Luis Porrello abstained from the vote since he works for HNTB. One interesting note, when the I-64 project is done this intersection will become a roundabout. The Preservation Board approved the encroachment with one abstention.

Fourth Ward Alderman O.L. Shelton requested the city expand the boundaries of The Ville local historic district, including the historic design standards. The process to research and recommend the approval was about a two year process. The Ville is the only historic district that currently doesn’t qualify for tax credits. This was due to the fact the that when the district was first approved in the late 80s it was thought nationally that districts of varied architecture shouldn’t qualify. Cultural Resources director Kathleen Shea indicated expanding the boundaries should help qualify the area for tax credits.

A couple of residents spoke in favor of the expanded district, including one woman that rehabs properties in the area. She indicated she has lived in The Ville since 1964. PB member Richard Callow moved that the board approve the petition to expand the district, request staff to prepare legislation to submit to the board of aldermen and that one member of the PB speak at the public hearing in favor of the bill.

The Preservation Board unanimously approved the motion.

Another district was up for discussion, this was an expansion of the Benton Park local historic district. A number of residents were present to speak in favor of the expansion although a couple left early because at this point we are already two and a half hours into the meeting. Preservation Board Chair Tim Mulligan recused himself as he lives in the area to be affected.

Todd Brandt,VP of the Benton Park Neighborhood Association, spoke in favor of the expanded boundaries. He mentioned renovated and newly constructed homes that are of questionable aesthetics. They are seeking some control to protect the value of the neighborhood. Some examples shown by the staff in their report

A number of residents spoke in opposition to the expanded district. One has lived in the neighborhood for 42 years (since birth). She was very passionate in her testimony. Her basic concern was the standards would force out low income residents such as herself.

This is a common problem where you are trying to get design standards implemented. She said people “try to make their properties presentable.” My view is often it is the people trying to “make improvements” that end up spending lots of money destroying the historic character of their homes. The Preservation Board unanimously approved the petition to expand the boundaries. Like The Ville previously, this goes next to the Board of Aldermen.

As an aside, I plan to look at some of the recent rehabs and new construction in the near future.

It is now three and a half ours into the meeting and the next issue is a proposed new home at 1419 Dolman in the Lafayette Square Local Historic District. Staff had issues with a few items in the design such as the building width and some window placement. The foundation material was unknown.

The applicant indicated a willingness to address concerns of the Preservation Board and the neighborhood. The building is on the Lafayette Square agenda for March 7, 2006. The Board gave preliminary approval.

A very interesting project was next on the agenda. The applicant is seeking to purchase a city-owned property that is a serious state of deterioration. The building is a short two-story structure with not much left. The applicant is seeking to add a third floor with a second empire mansard roof. The staff feels this building never had a third floor and it should not be added.

I see both arguments. A good question came up, do the remaining brick walls indicate brick pockets for a level third floor or a sloping roof? Nobody seemed to know. I’m torn on holding to what would have been built vs what makes sense today.

Discussion among board members centered on making sure the renovated structure “blended in.” But staff’s point is that it didn’t blend in when originally built and therefore we should not re-write history a hundred years later.

The Board gave preliminary approval as indicated in the agenda.

Must have food…

One of my favorite subjects began shortly after 8pm, replacement windows in a historic district without a permit. Basically the owner replaced a two wide double hung with some awning windows.

Time for this owner to go back to the window company that should have obtained the proper permits because the board denied approval of the non-conforming replacement windows already installed.

A new in-fill project is Soulard looked good but had a couple of small issues with the staff. The biggest issue was a request for a new curb cut on the side street. This odd site only has 14 ft along the alley.

Board approved the project with two conditions, one being that the project have a “Baltimore Chimney” on the south elevation as indicated on the north elevation. The other is that it not have the curb cut.

Another Soulard project is the expansion of Molly’s at 816 Geyer. The board approved the project with the condition the east elevation either be all brick or have windows.

This project has additions to two sides of an existing structure. It is intended to give the appearance of several buildings. However, the new facades do not have any front doors, either useable or fixed for appearance sake.

More new construction, this time in Lafayette Square. Staff had no major issues with the design. However, the neighborhood spoke against the project simply on the basis that neither the architect or owner submitted their proposal to the neighborhood.

The board gave preliminary approval.

Starving…

And finally, the gas meters in front issue!!!! Take a look at the last item on the agenda (linked above) for more info and photos. The project, called Lafayette Walk, includes 37 units in a total of six buildings. Building #1 is the first built, located at the corner of Mississippi and Chouteau. Building #2, not yet built, will be the other one facing Mississippi.

This item took a lot of time and I’m not going to go through all the points. Here are the highlights:

The meeting concluded at 10:25pm. This is way too long. As the amount of development in the city continues to rise and as more and more historic districts are established something needs to give. A 3-minute policy may need to be implemented for all speakers or they may need to meet twice per month if they have many items to review.

– Steve

Fun Afternoon at Mardi Gras in Soulard

Click here to see some of my pictures from Mardi Gras.

– Steve

What is Next For the Former St. Aloysius Complex?

One thing is known about St. Aloysius, the city’s Preservation Board will not be hearing an appeal from owner Jim Wohlert. I have confirmed with Cultural Resources Director, Kathleen Shea, that no appeal has been received by her office. Ms. Shea had sent letters of denial to Mr. Wohlert on January 24, 2006 following the December 19, 2005 Preservation Board meeting. The ordinance stipulates that any appeal must be filed within 30 days.

So if the developer continues to push his plan for detached housing where the graceful church buildings now stand he’ll have to go a different route. Enter Alderman Vollmer and his deferring accomplices. Look for legislation to exclude the 2+ acre site from preservation review or perhaps to exclude the neighborhood from the preservation review process altogether.

This would be an interesting turn of events now that Alderman Waterhouse is introducing legislation to put the adjacent 24th Ward back into the preservation review process (full story). Vollmer should keep in mind that removing the 24th Ward from preservation review was one of the actions that got Bauer recalled.

– Steve

The Future of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in the St. Louis Region

Local transit booster group Citizens for Modern Transit (CMT) sponsored a program earlier today called, The Future of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in the St. Louis Region. This invitation only event included representatives from throughout the region including, Donna Day from East-West Gateway Council of Governments; Rollin Stanley, St. Louis’ Director of Urban Planning & Design (and CMT board member); a number of local architects and developers, etc…

The guest speakers brought in by CMT were pretty impressive.

First up was Ken Kinney, the project director on the Northside/Southside Light Rail Study. Mr. Kinney is with the firm of HNTB out of their Chicago office. He talked about the current study which is building upon prior work done in 1998-2000. Specifically he mentioned the current study area is focusing solely on the City of St. Louis with the northside route ending near I-70 (close to Goodfellow) and the southside route ending at I-55 & Loughborough (yes, the site of “Loughborough Commons” sprawl center, still under construction)

Kinney indicated they are doing a “Transit/Development – Supportive Policy Analysis” as part of both study areas. From his comments I took this to mean two things. First he mentioned looking at other cities to see how their transit policies might help development. Second was to look at the municipal policies to see how that might affect (pro or con) development along proposed routes.

He admitted the most controversial part of the northside and southside routes are that they both include running at street level, especially downtown. He showed an example of a high-floor vehicle like our MetroLink vehicles in a center median situation (Manchester, England). As you can imagine this requires large platforms. As others in the process have previously indicated, they will most likely use what is referred to as a “low-floor” vehicle. These have a low center section that is seldom more than a foot above grade so stops are much easier to design and build. Meeting ADA (American’s with Disability Act) requirements are also much easier going this route.

For the low-floor light rail he showed a suburban Portland example in the center of Interstate Avenue. In this case the center of the road is consumed with the poles in the center and a line going in each direction. Traffic is kept to the outside and away from the tracks. The example at right is actually a computer mock up for Interstate Ave in Portland (source).

But next he showed his “favorite” example: the newish Portland Streetcar (a modern line, not vintage). His image shows new condo buildings being constructed next to the line. Below is an image from the same general area.

[Portland thumbnail by milantram, click image for full sized version.]

This streetcar line was not finished on my last visit to Portland. Time for another visit!

Next up to speak was Robert Cervero from the University of California at Berkeley. I see in the program that his “participation has been made possible through East-West Gateway Council of Governments.” Mr. Cervero is a subconsultant on the northside & southside study areas.

Most of are probably familiar with the term TOD (Transit Oriented Development) but he mentioned a couple of others. TOD’s step-brother, TAD (Transit Adjacent Development). A good example of TAD is say the suburban stuff in Richmond Heights off Eager road. This development is adjacent to transit but it not oriented to transit. Another is AOD, or Auto Oriented Development. This is suburbia or the proposed Grand McDonald’s. He used another phrase I really liked, “walk-n-ride” to describe just walking from your development to the transit train. This is a contrast to the common park-n-ride lot we see near most of our suburban MetroLink stations.

Cervero stressed “balanced corridor planning” when evaluating various criteria such as speed and development potential. He showed how New Jersey had a number of older commuter rail lines that were not encouraging new TOD’s around stations. After decreasing travel times to Manhattan from 45 minutes to 30 minutes suddenly everyone was interested in riding the lines and they began to see increased TODs and stations.

Cervero indicated he felt our MetroLink light rail system has been hugely successful from a ridership standpoint but not so much so from a TOD perspective. I’d certainly agree. St. Louis, he argues, took the path of least resistance when building our system by using existing tunnels and rail corridors. This path didn’t require expensive land purchases or the taking of homes (although it did require moving some graves near the airport). The problem with the existing route(s) is by using rail lines the transit wasn’t necessarily placed in areas where we might have seen increased development around a stop.

He concluded his time with a picture of the Grand South Grand area at Arsenal and Grand. He described the wonderful building fabric and said, “You almost want a Portland-style streetcar.” Not almost, I do want a streetcar line down Grand (among others)! I’ve made my preference for streetcars quite clear to CMT Executive Director Tom Shrout so when Cervero made this comment I looked over to see Tom’s reaction, he was looking back to see my reaction.

Last up was Jack Wierzenski from Dallas’ transit system, DART. [Side note: I took my driver’s test in my mom’s Dodge Dart] DART was established in 1983 with the system opening 13 years later in 1996. Since then they’ve managed to build considerable more total lines than us with far more coming on line in the next 10 years. After touring St. Louis today he said they are behind us with respect to retail & loft development downtown.

He showed some great examples of previous park-n-ride lots from the original system that are now TOD projects. The end of one line is in Plano, TX where their downtown was a bit tired. A new TOD has helped improve the area. The made a number of comments about their engineers, how their only focus was moving the transit vehicles as quickly as possible or having parking and bus lines right next to the stations. His job is balance the engineers against the need for creating quality pedestrian environments at the stations. Are you listening Metro?

Following the presentations was a frank discussion about where we are now. One participant didn’t think the images of dense new development would fly in north St. Louis because most residents would fear being displaced by eminent domain. Public approval is certainly needed so community concerns need to be addressed. The issue of ‘density’ as a dirty word came up and got a good chuckle from the entire room. One speaker, I think Jack Wierzenski from Dallas, indicated they do “visual surveys” where they use pictures/images to gauge people’s interest in various types of projects. Visually people will most often chose the dense and connected example but if given a written choice of low-density or high-density projects they’d chose the low-density. Visual surveys, are all you PR types listening?

I’ve got many more thoughts on encouraging TOD in the St. Louis region but I’l have to share those another day. What are your thoughts?

– Steve

Families Must Pay For St. Aloysius Windows A Second Time

Decades ago local families around St. Aloysius paid to have stained glass windows installed with their family names on them. For decades this is where they worshiped. Now the church is closed and if the new owner, Jim Wohlert, has his way the buildings will all be leveled.

When workers began removing the windows last year these families began inquiring about the windows bearing their family name. St. Ambrose, the parish where most of St. Aloysius parish was consolidated into, told them they’d be able to obtain the windows.

But the price tag is hefty.

One such family, who does not want to see the buildings razed, provided me with a copy of the letter they received from Fr. Bommarito. The cost to obtain their family windows? Try $2,350, half of the $4,700 appraised value. Keep in mind, this family paid for the windows in the first place!

Perhaps had the church sold the property to one of the other bidders for roughly $400K more they’d be able to return the windows to the original families without any cost to them. To the older members of these families, some of whom have lived in the area for 75 years or so, this is not easy money to find on such short notice.

Does the church have a layaway plan?

– Steve