Category: Downtown

Categories
Downtown Green Space JNEM National Historic Landmark National Register

Tell Senator McCaskill There’s No Need to Pass Arch Grounds Legislation Now

by Michael R. Allen

On October 3, Congressman William Clay (D-MO 1st) introduced HR 7252, which would downgrade the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial grounds from the current National Historic Landmark status to listing on the National Register of Historic Places and, most important, authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into an agreement with the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial Trust that would allow the Trust to manage the Memorial grounds and construct a museum there. The Danforth Foundation incorporated the Trust in June, with Peter Raven, Walter Metcalfe and Bob Archibald as the corporation’s directors.

Now, Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill has felt pressure to introduce a companion in the Senate. Believe it or not, word is that some parties want the bill to pass in the current lame duck Congress, while privatization-friendly President George W. Bush and Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne are still in office. McCaskill has yet to cave to the pressure. If she did, and the bill were to become law, a public process already underway for planning improvements to the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial would be stopped, and a private vision would be enshrined in federal law.

Clay’s bill is inappropriate on several fronts:

  • The bill short-changes the public, which has yet to see the National Park Service’s draft management plan for the Memorial or participate in the planned 45-day public comment period. NPS has released a summary of its preferred alternative, but has not issued the actual draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement. NPS will release that draft in January, with the comment period immediately afterward.
  • The National Park Service has called for an international design competition to be held next year where changes to the grounds could be visualized and a winning entry would be selected by a jury. This process would allow for a wide range of possibilities to be explored. The winning entry might call for something other than a museum on the grounds.
  • Congress should not exercise the power to remove National Historic Landmark status for political reasons (there is a formal process for removing the designation in place within the Department of the Interior).
  • It is an abuse of the purpose of the National Park system for Congress to direct the National Park Service to lease a National Park to a private group solely for construction. We can build a museum at the Memorial — although we already have two there — but we need not cede control to a private entity to do so. Without a public input process, we have no idea if there is support for the museum idea or what sort of museum is appropriate for the site.

    I urge my readers to contact Senator McCaskill (via this page) and tell her that the Clay bill is flawed and premature. Sending the same thoughts to Representative Clay (via this page) would be helpful as well.

    • Categories
    Downtown Historic Boats Missouri Riverfront

    A is Not for the Admiral

    by Michael R. Allen

    While Missouri Proposition A is not directly about historic preservation, there is a preservation-related consequence: the shuttering of the S.S. Admiral on the St. Louis riverfront. First built in 1907 and rebuilt to jazz-age standards in 1940, the beleaguered Art Moderne boat has lost its engine and much of its original interior, but it retains sophisticated, cool lines on the exterior. Of course, the body of the S.S. Admiral is hidden behind an ugly floating structure on the riverfront side, placing the only clear view from the river channel.

    Currently, Pinnacle Entertainment owns both the Admiral and Lumiere Place uphill. Pinnacle’s ownership prevents local competition as well as provides a close place where patrons can continue gambling after reaching loss limits at Lumiere. It’s a bad system, and I am not arguing that Pinnacle should continue it.

    Personally, I support allowing people to decide what to do with their own money. That support extends both to gamblers looking to lay some money down at a casino as well as casino operators looking to open new casinos. Proposition A doesn’t allow for a free market in casinos. Rather, it acts as a form of protectionism for current operators. The proposition would lift Missouri’s loss limits — the last left in the nation, but would also limit Missouri’s casino licenses to 13. Currently, there are 12 licenses and Pinnacle Entertainment is seeking to secure one for a new casino in Lemay. Obviously, Proposition A is a windfall for Pinnacle and other operators, and a roadblock to competition. I hope that the measure fails and a smarter, competition-oriented policy is adopted. After all, if gamblers will be pouring more money into casinos, they deserve choices.

    Back to the Admiral: If Proposition A passes, Pinnacle won’t need the old boat. Dan Lee, head of Pinnacle, told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in September that he might move the boat to a new city location temporarily, but eventually ditch it for a new facility that would assume the Admiral’s license. Should that course of events happen, no other operator will be able to buy the Admiral and obtain a gaming license. Any use for the Admiral that does not include gambling probably will fail. Stripped of so many other things, the Admiral has survived. Stripped of a gaming license, the boat won’t have much of a future. The threat to the Admiral is not a good reason to vote against Proposition A, but it will be a consequence of its passage.

    Categories
    Architecture Downtown Streets

    Locust Street Canyon

    by Michael R. Allen

    The view east from 11th Street of Locust Street in downtown St. Louis is encouraging. The differentiation of building heights, materials and styles gives the scene a truly urban complexity. Changes are in store as the Roberts Brothers prepare to rehabilitate two buildings (913 & 917 Locust) and demolish two buildings (921 & 923 Locust) in this scene. On the site of the demolished buildings will rise an addition to 917 Locust that will be part of a Hotel Indigo. How will their new building fit in this scene?

    Categories
    Architecture Downtown Housing

    Roberts Tower Rising Downtown

    by Michael R. Allen

    On one hand, we have what could be the start of a major economic recession. On the other hand, we have the first high-rise residential building in 40 years currently rising downtown. On one hand — there is no other hand! We are left with an encouraging contradiction: as the economic news consistently drags us down, the Roberts Tower rises up from the ground on Eighth Street, tempting us to likewise raise our hopes to the sky.

    Many developers talked about building new downtown residential buildings. Famously, we had the SkyHouse project on Washington, Daniel Libeskind renderings of Bottle District condominium towers, homes overlooking the baseball game at Ballpark Village, Park Pacific and Port St. Louis. Not one of these projects is under construction. Some are gone forever, in ways that are depressing. For instance, Park Pacific’s undulating Tucker Boulevard face won’t get built, while a plain0jane parking garage will be.

    Amid the general atmosphere of hype of the last five years, we’ve had out-of-towners (SkyHouse, Ballpark Village) tempt us with the siren call of tall residential buildings downtown. Whoever did not get a tingle of excitement when hearing about the sundry proposals has never entered Chicago, New York or any other high-rise metropolis and been swept away by the tempting poetry of a sense skyline. We all fell for the idea that St. Louis was soon poised to proclaim its renewal as a great place to live through a boom of skyline construction.

    Again, such a thrilling vision is far from reality. However, two tall buildings are reality — the Four Seasons Hotel at Lumiere Place, completed, and the residential Roberts Tower, under construction. The Roberts Brothers took three years to break ground, and may very well have slid the way of the other also-rans, but they broke ground this year on a $70 million 25-story modern high-rise residential building.

    The design is sleek, but not showy (at least, now that the giant letters spelling “ROBERTS” don’t appear in renderings). The steel building fits into a small spot between the Mayfair Hotel and the Old Post Office Plaza, creating a narrow body whose main articulation is a sweeping glass south wall. The other walls are to be cast concrete, and the ground floor will open onto the sidewalk and plaza with a restaurant space. The building is solidly in good taste, unlike the Four Seasons.

    The Roberts Tower design is also smart. The developers are seeking Gold LEED certification, and plan on many green technologies. From the south wall’s ample glazing to recycled materials going into the walls, carpets and counters, the building is ecologically progressive. The technologies used have not been used on such a scale in the city before.

    With 55 units on the fourth through 25th floors — the lower floors will be conference and fitness space shared with the Mayfair — the building won’t put a glut of new units on the market. I have no idea how sales are going for the units, or how closely the finished building will resemble the rendering prominently displayed on the site. I do know that the Roberts Tower is a great idea and its construction could not come at a better time.

    Categories
    Downtown Green Space JNEM

    National Park Service Retirees Oppose Preliminary Plan to "Privatize" Portion of St. Louis Gateway Arch Site

    Former NPS Leaders Object to Turning Over Portion of Historic Site to Danforth Foundation; Parallel Drawn Between Private Invasions of St. Louis Arch and Valley Forge NPS Sites.

    TUCSON, AZ. – October 22, 2008 – The preliminary plan outlined yesterday by the National Park Service (NPS) to allow significant changes to the ground and site for the historic “Gateway Arch” in St. Louis is being opposed by the 675-member Coalition of National Park Service Retirees (CNPSR).

    In objecting to the NPS plans, CNPSR officials said that the proposed changes to the Gateway Arch site is “a thinly veiled effort to have a significant portion of the memorial’s grounds transferred from NPS jurisdiction and programs to a private institution, the Danforth Foundation.”

    The Jefferson National Expansion Memorial (JNEM) is the official name for the Arch and surrounding landscaped grounds, which are administered by the NPS. The JNEM complex is a designated National Historic Landmark and one of the 391 units in the National Park System. In recent months, CNPSR has raised the alarm about private efforts to encroach on and undercut another major U.S. NPS site: Valley Forge in Pennsylvania.

    CNPSR Executive Council Member Don Castleberry said: “First we saw the attempt to ‘privatize’ a portion of Valley Forge and now the target is the the Gateway Arch in St. Louis. We have to draw a line now and say that national parks are not up for sale. Eero Saarinen’s iconic design, which is one of America’s most recognized and admired monumental features, attracts over 250,000 visitors annually. The surrounding grounds are planned to complement and provide for the backdrop for the monumental Gateway Arch. They are in integral part of the design and should not be
    turned over to a private entity.”

    Castleberry is a former regional director, Midwest Region, NPS. For more than eight years, he had management oversight over JNEM.

    The proposed changes to the Gateway Arch site are an outgrowth of a general management planning process, with public input, evaluating a range of five different development proposals for the future management of the JNEM site.

    On October 21, 2008, the NPS announced its preferred alternative, which includes an innocuous sounding plan for “heritage education and visitor amenities”, and proposes a design competition to “revitalize the memorial grounds, expand interpretation, education opportunities and visitor amenities.”

    Castleberry said: “In fact, what this would mean is the construction of a new, large building on the grounds. It would be completely inconsistent with the original Gateway Arch site design, and would conflict with the purpose of the grounds as backdrop to the arch. The existing NPS visitor center/museum is purposely placed underground to avoid conflicting with the original plan. If local interests wish to be helpful in promoting the Arch and not their own agendas, they might consider assisting NPS to make improvements to the existing museum and programs.”

    CNPSR officials said they have no concern with minor changes that are consistent with the original look and feel of the National Historic Site. One possible change would be to improve connections with the surrounding community, including the addition of covered crossings over Interstate 55.

    Even though a “preferred alternative” plan has been selected by the Department of Interior, the process will continue for some time, with completion not expected until 2009. CNPSR urges citizens interested in protecting the integrity of this national monument, to oppose (1) inappropriate development on the Arch Grounds and (2) any transferring of jurisdiction from the NPS to a private organization.

    ABOUT CNPSR

    The 675 members of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees are all former employees of the National Park Service with a combined 20,000 years of stewardship of America’ most precious natural and cultural resources. In their personal lives, CNPSR members reflect the broad spectrum of political affiliations. CNPSR members now strive to apply their credibility and integrity as they speak out for national park solutions that uphold law and apply sound science. The Coalition counts among its members: former national park directors and deputy directors, regional directors, superintendents, rangers and other career professionals who devoted an average of nearly 30 years each to protecting and interpreting America’s national parks on behalf of the public. For more information, visit the CNPSR Web site at
    http://www.npsretirees.org.

    Categories
    Downtown Green Space JNEM

    National Parks Conservation Association Concerned about Potential Development on Grounds of National Historic Landmark in St. Louis

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    October 21, 2008

    Lynn McClure, Midwest Regional Director
    National Parks Conservation Association
    P: 312. 263.0111, Cell: 312.343.7216

    “Visitors to the iconic Gateway Arch in St. Louis would benefit from improved services and a revitalized Museum of Westward Expansion. But the National Parks Conservation Association is concerned after reviewing the

    Categories
    Downtown Green Space JNEM

    NPS Expected to Announce Preferred Alternatives for Arch Grounds Today

    by Michael R. Allen

    The National Park Service is expected to release its preferred alternatives for the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial Management Plan today. Will the NPS enshrine the wishes of the Danforth Foundation, or look beyond the top-down plan for a true vision of the total potential of the Arch grounds? Will NPS consent to some development of the grounds? Will NPS look to an expansive plan for connecting the grounds to downtown, or endorse the drop-in-the-bucket, overpriced “lid” idea? Will the NPS act will diligence as in its role as the defender of a National Historic Landmark? We shall soon find out.

    In the meantime, read the excellent article on the Cultural Landscape Foundation website, Jefferson National Expansion: Kiley’s Iconic Memorial Landscape at Risk!” by Lynn McClure and Alan Spears.

    Categories
    Architecture Art Downtown Events

    Architecture St. Louis’ First Exhibit Opens on Friday

    Following the launch of educational programs at its new downtown home, Architecture St. Louis, Landmarks Association of St. Louis hosts its first public exhibit opening at the new space this Friday, October 10.

    In conjunction with the American Institute of Architects – St. Louis Chapter and the chapter’s Young Architects Forum, Landmarks presents After Hours, a juried student drawing competition shown alongside assorted work (furniture, photography, collage, painting) produced by young architects either unlicensed or within ten years of licensure. Subjects range from St. Louis architecture to nature to modern furniture.

    Opening: Friday, October 10 from 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. (Work will be on display 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Monday – Friday for the subsequent two weeks.)

    Where: Architecture St. Louis, 911 Washington Avenue #170 (located in the arcade of the Lammert Building)

    Categories
    Downtown Green Space I-70 Removal JNEM Planning Streets

    The Greening of Memorial Drive

    by Michael R. Allen

    I count on my readers’ intake of other blogs on the same subjects that I cover, which is why I rarely link directly to the excellent posts made by other local urbanist bloggers.

    Still, sometimes a post elsewhere is so intriguing that I just want everyone in the world to read it. Rick Bonasch’s post “Yin, Meet Yang” today on STL Rising is one of those. In June, Rick introduced a plan for reworking Memorial Drive that is daring, bold and intelligent — take out the depressed and raised sections of I-70 and Memorial Drive, and put in an at-grade parkway that is both friendly to pedestrians and inspiring to drivers who get a great view of the Gateway Arch. This idea trumps the “lid” plan that offers little change to the ugly mess of roadways that detract from the Arch grounds’ western edge and prevent real access between downtown and the grounds. The “lid” is showy but also expensive, ineffective and unsustainable. For less money we could have a real urban design solution; for more, we can have a band-aid that covers about ten percent of a big wound.

    Today, Rick offers a new reason why the idea of reworking Memorial Drive is a good one — it can be very green.

    Categories
    Downtown Green Space Parking Planning

    Thompson Coburn Garage and the Economics of Parking Downtown

    by Michael R. Allen

    Today, the St. Louis Business Journal is reporting that giant law firm Thompson Coburn announced today that it has signed a 12-year lease to remain in the US Bank Tower at 7th and Washington downtown. The lease comes with city incentives totalling $700,000 and, most interesting and unusual, a state-financed $15 million parking garage on the site of the Ambassador Building at 7th and Locust streets, currently a lifeless and unattractive “plaza.”

    The announcement comes after speculation that the law firm would relocate to the planned Brown Shoe Company campus on Maryland Avenue in Clayton. Clayton is still luring major businesses out of downtown, and snagging some that have also looked at moving downtown. Thus, the announcement is good news for a downtown that is seeing a decline in residential projects and a small, hopeful rise in the creation of rehabbed office space.

    The parking garage component is predictable, although undesirable in terms of planning. Sadly, we live in a city with a parking economy built on an inverse ratio of supply and demand. Downtown St. Louis has more parking spaces than residents, and probably more spaces than daily workers. Parking is cheap and easy. Parking is not quite free, like in the suburbs, but in this dense urban core, it barely costs anyone to park at all. In these cirumstances, any major employer who wants copious and adjacent parking gets it — either by building a new garage, leasing existing spaces or moving out of downtown where parking doesn’t cost employees at all.

    Obviously, downtown has an excess of parking. Lots are obvious visual blight, but garages aren’t much better. Even with street level retail, a garage doesn’t generate the same level of activity, visual interest and use as a building. That a garage on the Ambassador site is an improvement over the plaza says little about the new garage and a lot about the inadequacies of the protected private plaza.

    Pine Street suffers from a glut of parking garages, and has little to recommend it as an attractive street on which to do muchy more than park or grab a quick lunch. Locust Street is much better, although the recent addition of the Ninth Street Garage chips away at its urban character. The Thompson Coburn garage will be two blocks from the Nonth Street Garage, and only one block from one of downtown’s ugliest garages on Seventh Street, the so-called Hubcap Palace at Seventh and Olive streets.

    This proximity is not good for developing a downtown that is a compelling, lively, architecturally distiguished place. The economics of parking and land values downtown allow such proximity, while the planning apparatus of city government remains weak. Rather than examine the health of street life or even desirable land uses for downtown, all decisions are subsumed by economic logic. That’s well and good for function, yet we must remember downtown is not simply a series of useful structures, but also the core of our city that defines its architectural character to the world.

    Obviously, we need Thompson Coburn and other employers downtown. The firm needs parking. But we all need a downtown that compels the world to respect the great city of St. Louis. (In other words, this had better be the best damn parking garage in the world!)