Two St. Louis Blogs Make ‘Top 100 Architecture Blogs’ List

Congratulations to Toby Weiss and Andrew Raimist for making a list of the top 100 architecture blogs.  International Luxury Home website ‘International Listings’ created the diverse list.

48. B.E.L.T.: This blog is about “Built Environment in Layman’s Terms.” But, the photography is by Toby Weiss, an architectural photographer. Once again, this blog was difficult to classify so it ended up as a niche blog since the writing is as interesting as the photographs.

76. Architectural Ruminations: Andrew Raimist, from Raimist Architecture, Inc., offers his perspectives on St. Louis, Missouri, modern architecture including works of modern architect Harris Armstrong, and Raimist’s photographs. 

Congrats to these two for the widespread recognition of their work.  Click here to view the full list.

A ‘Rural Renewal’ Program Would Provide Habitat for Deer and other Wildlife

The tony collection of McMansion subdivisions known as Town & Country, MO is back on the issue of Deer overpopulation. It seems their 1-3 acre lots amongst the natural woods are overrun with deer. The reality is that our natural environment is overrun with low-density and often tacky housing that requires an SUV to go anywhere. From a KSDK report:

“Deer like the suburbs that we build,” said Erin Shank, a Missouri Department of Conservation urban wildlife biologist. “They like that broken forest interspersed with meadow-like lawns. That’s really ideal for them, so their populations have really grown over the last several decades.”

Wow, it seems they have managed to design an environment ideally suited to the main deer population but only a small segment of the human population. A number of years ago Town & Country engaged in a horrible plan to relocate the deer but many perished due to shock (see Grim Harvest). Some municipalities allow hunting using bows to avoid shooting some VP from shooting a lawyer friend in the face. Town & Country, however, does not yet permit hunting. Some are advocating traps where they are instantly killed via a bolt to the brain. Ick. Others say the deer are fine and simply plant other vegetation that deer don’t like, a logical solution in my view.

But I have some other ideas as well. We could start by banning vegetation all together. These people with their 4-bedroom/4-car garage houses on an acre of land like the illusion of country living but we know they really are not. So I say we prohibit them from growing any sort of plants outdoors — at least the ones known to attract deer. Hey, if they don’t like it they can always move much easier than the deer. I don’t think this is going far enough though. Those brick front houses look bad enough as it is but without vegetation it would be a horrible sight. The kids there already suffer from not being able to walk or bike anywhere so they really shouldn’t have to live without hostas and ferns.

I say we hire PGAV or Development Strategies to do a blighting study on the area. We argue that all of Town & Country and everything else in St. Louis County outside of the I-270 highway loop is Ecologically Obsolete. With places like Creve Coeur, Chesterfield and Dardenne Prairie all working on town centers to create walkable destinations we can justify that others are old fashioned and obsolete forms of development. New Urbanism represented by New Town at Charles or even old urbanism represented by original city development as well as the older ring of suburban development such as downtown Ferguson, Maplewood, Webster Groves and such is more ecologically sustainable.

So much like the maps of the 40s & 50s that justified razing entire sections of the city because a percentage of the structures lacked indoor plumbing, we can create maps of the region where the obsolete development pattern is too low to sustain a walk-to town center & transit. Everything below a certain threshold would be targeted. I call it Rural Renewal. St. Louis County would identify areas for land clearance, returning the land to nature with wildlife and vegetation taking over former manicured lawns. The deer population would once again be controlled with bobcats and other natural predators. Of course we’d need to use eminent domain to take all the homes, strip shopping centers and fast food joints. We’d need to clear thousands of acres at a time.

This could all be justified, of course, based economic development for the region. By returning an area to nature we’d force residents into existing areas, assuming we also limited fringe development. People living in an $800K house in Town and Country could do wonders with a $500 house owned by the LRA! Think of the economic benefits of such a renewal plan — one that could easily past muster after the Kelo decision on eminent domain. We’d see a surge in new construction within the I-270 highway loop giving new vitality to both the city and older areas of St. Louis County. Low density areas in the county, but within the I-270 loop, would be targeted for redevelopment to accommodate those displaced for the new rural areas. Rail transit (commuter, light rail) and quality localized service via bus and/or streetcar would be far more feasible than currently. We’d naturally eliminate some of the 91 municipalities in St. Louis County as well as excessive school districts, fire districts and so on. These new large ‘rural renewal’ areas would become wonderful natural areas again — attracting tourists to our area. This could become a model program for other regions to follow.

It would, of course, be difficult on those being displaced but they really shouldn’t stand in the way of progress and that which is beneficial to the larger region. The environment and the economy both outweigh their private land interests. We’ve been through large scale land clearance projects before and the suburbanites always seemed supportive of such efforts.

Tiny Municipality Better Known After Abusive Cop Video on YouTube

Last month I showed you videos from Jimmy Justice — the New Yorker out to show the world that New York traffic cops, and other officials, park in places where nobody should be paking — such as in front of fire hydrants, bus stops and on public sidewalks. He gets in the face of these officials and screams at them about breaking the law.

Well, by now, most of you have likely heard about the St. Louis area case of a young motorist berated by a cop from the virtually unknown municipality of Saint George (pop. 1,288, google map).

Here is part 1 of the video. Note, the video doesn’t show much but the audio records the entire scenario. The cop uses the f-word often so just make note of that if you are watching at the office, around impressionable ears or just plain offended by the f-word then you may want to skip this one.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8033SPavXEc[/youtube]
The National Association of Motorists, with a slogan of “we fight back against unfair traffic law” has the story with a complete transcript here.

Time for me to get a hidden scooter-cam! This cop may have been having a bad day but that is no excuse in my view — he should have asked to be off duty or done something to get help. He should not be allowed to have a badge, billy club and certainly not a gun. He shouldn’t even be permitted to be a mall security guard! The cop’s attorney says the driver, Brett Darrow, taunts police.
Other sources:

• KSDK Channel 5 (w/video of news story)
  
• Officer.com has an earlier Post-Dispatch story.

Today’s Post-Dispatch sheds some light on St. George:

It’s one-fifth of a square mile of small brick homes and condominiums — amid a sea of small brick homes and condominiums — at Interstate 55 and Reavis Barracks Road in south St. Louis County.

Like so many of the county’s 91 municipalities, it’s a subdivision with police power, and no shortage of it. Some who have gotten tickets might have wondered why St. George even exists. They can thank moms in two subdivisions, back in 1948, who wanted their kids bused to school. Bayless schools would not send buses. So the subdivisions incorporated as St. George, which allowed them to join Affton schools.

Yes, this is why we have 91 municipalities in St. Louis County — because it was very easy to incorporate. Decades later we are left with tiny villages and towns trying to find ways to pay for services demanded by residents. Like the City of St. Louis of past, these incorporated areas find themselves losing residents as people move further out for newer digs or, ironically, move back to the city for a more urbane lifestyle. So they try to draw big box stores, strip centers and issue as many tickets to motorists as they can.

Getting the city back into St. Louis County is potentially an impossible task, one that requires a statewide vote to change the Missouri constitution. However, consolidating municipalities, school districts and other governmental jurisdictions within St. Louis County is relatively easy. Two subdivisions, that incorporated nearly sixty years ago, do not need to remain separate with its own police force, six aldermen and a mayor.

St. Louis Needs a Car Sharing Program

I’ve been enjoying my recent lack of car ownership but I am far from car-free, for example I catch rides with friends at times. This is a good thing, it forces some car pooling where we all might take single occupancy vehicles otherwise. I’ve had a meeting on the east side with a combination of my scooter, light rail, bus and walking — quite enjoyable. But I tell you, I’ve gotten soaked before and right now it is scorching hot outside. Just try to find a public drinking fountain these days.

There have been times where I wanted to go beyond where my scooter and transit would take me — not necessarily long distance but just in busy areas where transit is not convenient. For these times it would be nice to have access to a car maybe just for an hour or two. This is where car sharing (wiki) comes in the picture.

From local co-ops to national companies like Flexcar and Zipcar, car sharing is becoming increasingly popular across North America. It allows people to not own a car but have access to one those times they need it. Locally people have been working on car sharing for some time, trying to get funding to support the cars when not in use. The community benefits are great — people spend less money on car ownership so they have it for other things such as housing, food, or even entertainment. With more people owning fewer cars, less space is dedicated to the storage of cars — mostly sitting idle all day.

At right, a Toyota Corolla from Flexcar near transit in downtown San Diego. 

Paul McKee, Board Member of St. Charles-Based Pro-Sprawl “Urban Choice Coalition”

Paul McKee, the St. Charles developer and land baron behind the “Blairmont” project has continued to remain in the news of late. I ran across his name while researching the board members of a pro-sprawl, anti-city group based in St. Charles County. Mr. McKee is a board member of a group that interestingly is anti government intervention out in the virgin farmlands but is all in favor of intervention in the city.

The following is the mission statement for the Urban Choice Coalition in its entirety:

WE BELIEVE in the right of individuals to live wherever they choose and can afford. We reject the blanket condemnation of growth in suburban counties as being a root cause of urban decay and further reject the pejorative term “urban sprawl” to describe the healthy expansion of new communities.

WE BELIEVE that it is the right of individuals to select the state, city, county, neighborhood or development of their choice to call home and not be denied governmental services, grants or benefits, otherwise available on a national or statewide basis, because of their choice of residence.

It should not be the role of government to deny services to anyone based on their choices of where to live.

It should not be the role of government to set up artificial growth boundaries, outside of which citizens or communities receive any less governmental benefits.

It should not be the role of state or regional government planning agencies to erect growth boundaries and attempt to dictate or dissuade anyone from living where they choose.

WE FURTHER BELIEVE certain public policy issues should be resolved on a statewide or regional basis, but that those decisions concerning who and where to extend local utilities and roads, or to build new schools and local government facilities are, for the most part, best left to local decision makers elected by the people they represent and that these local decisions should not be turned over to or subject to, further review by statewide or regional planning commissions not elected by the people.

WE FAVOR enhancing the quality of life in the urban core and positive inducements to promote “city living” as the best means of attracting new residents and stabilizing older neighborhoods.

But presumably it should be the role of the state governent to enact massive tax breaks for one person, say Paul McKee, so that he may assemble large areas of land within a single municipality within the state. Of couse the legislation passed by the Missouri legislature isn’t limited to McKee’s well-known but unannounced housing project but the various requirements pretty much make it tailor made just for him.

It would seem to be that an individual property rights type person, one who opposes big government intervention in land planning matters, would also oppose such intervention everywhere. But to McKee and his co-sprawlers they want it all — the ability to rape open farmland with single-use projects which are auto dependent as well as receive huge tax breaks for assembling land (which happens to contain people & buildings) on the scale of urban renewal projects like Pruitt-Igoe.

Oh yes, I see, they believe we need to have “positive inducements” in order to attract people to this idea of “city living.” Why the quotes on city living McKee & Co? I know why, you don’t really understand city living. Or maybe you do? You are likely afraid of the whole idea of people enjoying dense and walkable mixed-use neighborhoods. Sure, you talk a nice game about the “rights of indiviuals” to live where they like but you are all afraid they will stop picking the auto-centric housing subdivisions you call “communities.” And face it boys, the sprawl neighorhoods you’ve littered on the landscape for years has absolutely nothing to do with free choice — government planning has created the zoning codes that mandate everything from the lot size to the street width.

Pro-sprawl zoning in the suburbs has limited choices  — you can’t just build a corner storefront with your living space above anywhere you think their might be demand.  Oh no, in their world we must divide everything up — no mixing of residential, retail and office.  They  don’t really support individualism or free thinking about land use, they like what exists and simply want nobody to stop them until they’ve managed to merge St. Louis with Columbia MO.

The only way New Town at St. Charles got built in the urban manner that it did (urban relative to lot sizes, setbacks, street widths, etc…) is that the City of St. Charles agreed to adopt DPZ’s smart code for New Town.  Without this new zoning, what we see in New Town would not have been legally allowed as the area was zoned for industrial uses.  So where are McKee & Co when it comes to the sprawl-mandated zoning that predominates St. Charles County?  Right behind it 100%!

Another section above is how they like decisions left to local decision makers.  I’m just guessing because that is cheaper for them than having to contribute to a bunch of regional and state officials.  This weekend’s Post-Dispatch story on McKee pointed out his contributions to Aldermanic President Lewis Reed and Mayor Francis Slay.  Of course, to get that new tax bill passed he had to drop some money around the state as well.

To see the list of directors for the Urban Choice Coalition don’t look for it on their website.  You might even get the impression from their anonymous site that they are ashamed of their views — not wanting to be associated with it.  I can’t say that I blame them really, I would not want to put my name on that BS either.  So for the board list I had to go to the Secretary of State’s records, click here for their last report.  Basically it is all the people that financially benefit from the planned sprawl of the countryside in St. Charles County, including engineers, road builders, and the Executive Director of the Home Builders Association of Greater St. Louis.

Everyone agrees that North St. Louis needs major new investment and infill construction.  I just don’t think McKee and his anti-city, pro-sprawl buddies are the right people for the job.