Screening of ‘The Pruitt-Igoe Myth’ Saturday May 14 at Noon

Failed buildings are often forgotten shortly after they are abandoned and razed, if not before. Pruitt-Igoe is different, the public housing complex has been gone nearly twice as long as it stood and it remains of interest around the world.

Many were impacted, both good and bad, by having lived at Pruitt-Igoe.   A recently completed documentary, The Pruitt-Igoe Myth, looks at the buildings and the people housed in them:

Destroyed in a dramatic and highly-publicized implosion, the Pruitt- Igoe public housing complex has become a widespread symbol of failure amongst architects, politicians and policy makers.

The Pruitt-Igoe Myth explores the social, economic and legislative is- sues that led to the decline of conventional public housing in America, and the city centers in which they resided, while tracing the personal and poignant narratives of several of the project’s residents.

In the post-War years, the American city changed in ways that made it unrecognizable from a generation earlier, privileging some and leaving others in its wake.

The film was directed by Chad Freidrichs and produced by Chad Freidrichs, Jaime Freidrichs, Paul Fehler and Brian Woodman. The film’s Flickr account contains great images. The film can be followed on Twitter and Facebook. Saturday (5/14) you can see the film for $10 at the Tivoli Theater on Delmar, noon.

Here is the film’s trailer:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7RwwkNzF68

The filmmakers spent nearly four years on this project. I was shown a rough cut at my loft a couple  of years ago but Wednesday night was my first viewing of the completed film.  I’m very impressed how they showed the good, bad & ugly sides of Pruitt-Igoe.

– Steve Patterson

Readers Not Too Interested In Gov. Nixon’s Actions on Controversial Bills

Only 54 readers voted in the poll last week, the lowest response I’ve ever had for a weekly poll:

Q: Gov. Nixon signed ‘compromise’ bills on puppy mills & vetoed workplace discrimination bill, thoughts?

1. Nixon should have vetoed both 22 [40.74%]
2. Nixon got it right 15 [27.78%]
3. Nixon should have vetoed the puppy bills but signed the workplace discrimination bill 12 22.22%
4. Nixon should have signed both 4 7.41%
5. unsure/no opinion 1 1.85%

Glad to see that 40% thought Nixon should have vetoed both.

– Steve Patterson

Guest Opinion: The Free State of St. Louis

Guest opinion by Chris Andoe

In the event you’re not familiar with the allegory of the frog in boiling water I’ll share it with you. Drop a frog in a pot of boiling water and it’ll immediately jump out. Drop it in a pot of cool water, slowly heat until boiling, and it will just sit there and die.

The St. Louis region is the frog and the pot of boiling water is Missouri.

St. Louis has always had an uncomfortable relationship with outstate Missouri, leading to byzantine arrangements like the state controlling our police department. There’s a general understanding that nobody from St. Louis could go on to be governor, and we can’t even agree with our rural neighbors on how to pronounce the state name.

The temperature has been turned up a degree or two at a time for well over a hundred years and with recent events we find it at a rolling boil. Still, many don’t see a need to jump.

The perverse new congressional map guts representation in the St. Louis region, the economic engine of the state, shifting even more power to the rural areas.  Outrageously some of our region’s own “leaders” collaborated with the GOP to allow this to happen, including Rep. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, who said she was not concerned about the Democratic Party’s objections to the eliminating of one of the region’s congressional seats, or that 75% of Missourians now find themselves in gerrymandered districts that are solidly Republican. No, as long as the new map preserved Congressman Clay’s seat she’d back it. “I’m black before I’m a Democrat” Nasheed infamously said.

Can you imagine the delight of Republican strategists upon hearing her divisive, inflammatory, racially charged statement? Not only did she give them what they wanted with the new map, she gave them an outstanding tool in their efforts to get the votes of white Independents and Democrats. As the television infomercials say, “But wait! There’s more!” The self-serving Nasheed also helped Republicans to gut Prop B, the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act which passed by large margins in her St. Louis district.

State leaders were more concerned about upsetting the puppy mill lobby than the people of St. Louis and Kansas City. Because of pitiful leadership St. Louis gets one less congressional seat, puppy mill dogs get less humane conditions, and Nasheed gets a coveted third floor office in Jefferson City.

Time and again the St. Louis region winds up infighting over the crumbs after the bloated Jefferson City eats its fill. St. Louis pays the bills in the state with only meager representation, and some of the region’s own representatives are merely the lapdogs of outstate Republicans.

If there were ever a time for radical thinking, this is it. In a world economy built on innovation, the Missouri state motto “Show Me” doesn’t cut it. It’s time for the St. Louis region to lead. I also think it’s time for the region to secede from Missouri.

There’s legal precedent for the separation of a portion of an existing state from the original state in order to form a new one. In 1820, Maine split off from Massachusetts and was admitted to the Union as the 23rd state. At this moment there’s an aggressive movement in Pima County, Arizona to form a new state. Hugh Holub, the founder of this movement, explains “If the original American Revolution was triggered by the colonial people feeling they didn’t have a say in the government from London….the movement to create Baja Arizona is another in a long history of people wanting not to have their lives run by people with very different values and agendas who live somewhere else.”

A similar movement has begun in South Florida.

Think of all we’re giving to a state that values backwoods puppy mill operators more than the citizens of their mightiest city. Everything from tax dollars to electoral votes. It doesn’t make sense.

I’m asking the people of this region to shake the “show me” mentality and participate in innovative discussions about the future. Research what’s going on in Pima County, brainstorm about what’s possible. Even if secession doesn’t happen maybe the discussions will serve to wake the sleeping giant that is St. Louis, leading to a revolt against the tyranny of Jefferson City.

– Chris Andoe

Chris Andoe is a writer and community organizer who has divided his time between St. Louis and San Francisco for the past decade. He earned the moniker “The Emperor of St. Louis” as the crown wearing Master of Ceremonies for the zany Metrolink Prom, where hundreds of transit supporters pack the train for the city’s biggest mobile party. Andoe writes for St. Louis’ Vital Voice.

Great Potential, Little Hope

The above storefront building at 2909-2917 Marcus Ave is owned by the city’s Land Reutilization Authority (LRA).  The building is just west of the Shelley House I blogged about last Tuesday.  If not for being in a local historic district, the city would have razed this structure years ago. The LRA came out of urban renewal when the idea of razing buildings so land could be reutilized was all the rage.  Today the LRA is a dumping ground for unwanted property:

The Land Reutilization Authority (LRA) receives title to all tax delinquent properties not sold at the Sheriff’s sale. It also receives title to properties through donations. The SLDC Real Estate Department maintains, markets, and sells these properties and performs land assemblage for future development.

The LRA has received attention in recent years, the RFT quoted a state audit in 2009:

The LRA does not have contracts related to costs incurred for property maintenance and upkeep. During the year ended June 30, 2008, the LRA paid approximately $660,000 to the St. Louis Development Corporation for property upkeep services, and $100,000 to the city’s Forestry Division for grass cutting, weed maintenance, and debris removal. In addition, there is no documentation to support why only $100,000 was paid while the Forestry Division’s billing records indicate it incurred charges of $1,658,000 for LRA properties. LRA staff indicated the land sales do not generate sufficient revenues to pay for all related costs and the city’s General Fund incurs the majority of the additional costs.

More recent:

A new study by the Show-Me Institute trains a spotlight on the largest St. Louis landholder. This is not any one individual or developer, but the Land Reutilization Authority, a joint creation of the city of St. Louis and the state of Missouri, which was set up in 1971 for the purpose of putting abandoned, tax-delinquent properties back into productive use.

The problem is, the LRA seems to have done more to thwart development than to encourage it. During the past four decades, the LRA has accumulated a larger and larger inventory of vacant properties in St. Louis, while rejecting many offers from private individuals and small businesses to purchase selected properties from the agency. (St. Louis Beacon: LRA needs to sell a lot of lots)

When I started this post I was just going to comment on how I liked the feel of the area, the arrangement of streets and buildings.  That changed when I discovered the city owns the building.  Many have rightly complained about Paul McKee letting his properties deteriorate, but at least he has a plan.

The city has no plan for this area, other than let it continue to decline further.  Then what?

The potential is all around, that “feel” I was talking about is great. Turning the area around takes leadership that appreciates the urban design of the period, rather than try to turn it into a late 20th century suburb. Given our lack of such leadership, with a few exceptions, I have little hope for this area. Of course I know our city can’t prosper if large areas are left to disappear.

– Steve Patterson

Poll: Thoughts on the former Sportsman’s Park

Sportsman’s Park had two addresses: 3623 Dodier St. (Cardinals) & 2911 N Grand Blvd (Browns). Yes, St. Louis’ two major league teams played at the same ballpark on North Grand until the Browns became the Baltimore Orioles in 1954.  The last game at the ballpark was played 45 years ago today, May 8, 1966. That day the Cardinals lost to the San Francisco Giants 10-5 (source).

Many in St. Louis enjoyed games from the Grand Stand for decades, others not as long:

[Dateline: May 4] 1944 – Blacks were allowed to buy grandstand seats for the first time in St. Louis history. St. Louis was the last of the major league clubs to integrate seating. Blacks had been restricted to the bleachers. (Source)

The last to integrate? Hmm, not surprised.

I personally feel it was a mistake to relocate what had been renamed Busch Stadium to a razed section of downtown (see Urban Renewal Destroyed St. Louis’ Early Chinatown, Hop Alley). Baseball was first played on this site in 1866! A field does remain as part of the Herbert Hoover Boys & Girls Club.  I wonder what Grand & St. Louis Ave would be like today if the Cardinals had remained on the site of Sportsman’s Park. Would it be a diverse & bustling neighborhood or would the surrounding neighborhoods have been razed for surface parking?

I realize the 1960s were a turbulent decade. The 8th Inning of Ken Burns’ Baseball series looked at this period. It starts with the razing of Ebbets Field, vacant after the Brooklyn Dodgers became the Los Angeles Dodgers.  Ballpark after ballpark was razed in this decade as baseball fought for fans, many interested in football.

The poll this week, upper right of blog, is about Sportsman’s Park.

– Steve Patterson