Initial Thoughts On Proposed ‘City District’ In North St. Louis

In 1990, at just 23, I fell in love with St. Louis and its quirky street grid. I hadn’t yet been to New York or Chicago but I knew many big cities had rigid orthogonal grids — nothing but right angles.

St.Louis’ grid, on the other hand, had right, obtuse, and acute angles. This meant interesting views from various directions, buildings designed to fit into the odd-shaped parcels. Some streets follow old trails, the neighborhoods built up around the meandering paths.

I simply adore this about St. Louis.

In my first 6-9 months here I made my way along North & West Florissant Avenue as it makes it way up through North St. Louis. My destination was O’Fallon Park — the neighborhood and city park.

Right before the park was the remnants of once-thriving commercial district. I’ve been back there many times over the years in a car, bike, bus, and motor scooter.

This old commercial area is the center of a new revitalization project called “The City District.”

Phase One
During the $34 million Phase One, 66 parcels will be demolished and the land will be reallocated for new construction of retail, homes and community greenspaces. More than 50 percent of these properties are currently vacant. The construction team is working on master plan and design development and bidding. Demolition will begin in March. Kwame Building Group is serving as the construction manager and program manager. The architect is Jackson Design Group.

In Phase One, the construction team also will build City Plaza, which will create vibrant shopping and recreational opportunities and a thriving local labor force. The commercial center will feature extensive retail and office space, including a grocery store and bowling alley.

Phase Two
The O’ Fallon Neighborhood is home to some of St. Louis’ largest and most historical homes rivaling the size and stylings found in the Central West End and surrounding Tower Grove Park and Forest Park. In Phase Two, $1 million will be invested in rehabilitating 26 existing homes. Large single-family homes will be converted into multi-use rental properties while retaining their architectural history. A $24 million project will construct new single and multi-family homes.

Culturally competent and equitable redevelopment practices will be central throughout the five-year project. The KWAME team is committed to maximizing MBE/WBE and local firm participation. The project team has established a partnership with the City of St. Louis to increase community safety and security focused on community competent policing. Existing infrastructure will be reimagined to improve and promote public transit and pedestrian accessibility. (Kwame Building Group)

My initial thoughts are generally positive, the area desperately needs investment after decades of disinvestment by whites and then blacks. I’m very glad this effort is coming from the black community, not an old white suburban developer. It’s a very good thing they’ve given this commercial district a name — that’s important for creating a positive identity.

However, I’m very concerned about demolition of currently occupied structures. Reallocating land sounds like making wide suburban lots rather than the existing narrow lots with garages and services off the alley. How the large triangle created as West Florissant splits is treated will be very important. It’s all asphalt now. Lots of unanswered questions.

Wisely they’ve said it will take multiple phases and five years, though I expect it’ll take even longer. And that’s ok, it didn’t decline overnight so we can’t expect an immediate reversal. I’m looking forward to seeing more details.

— Steve Patterson

Reaching The O’fallon Park Recreation Center

Previous posts on the O’Fallon Park Recreation Center covered the political standoff (Poll: Thoughts On The Not Yet Open O’Fallon Park Recreation Complex) and agreement (Readers Split On O’Fallon Park Controversy, Agreement Reached), today I want to talk about how to reach the Rec Center once it opens.

Many residents using the new facility, as well as YMCA/Herbert Hoover staff, will drive there. But others will walk or bike there and still others will come from further away riding the #74 (Florissant) MetroBus. I’ll cover all modes but lets start with transit and pedestrians.

b

As the pictures above show, the pedestrian access from the nearby neighborhood, Florissant Ave. and MetroBus is excellent. A straighter path would be a shorter but not possible due to the grade change. Besides, if you’re going to work out saving a few steps probably isn’t a priority. Pedestrians just have to cross one internal park roadway, they don’t have to walk in it. Unless they are coming from or going to the O’Fallon Park Boathouse or if you live to the southeast of the park, across Harris & Adelaide Avenues, then access is tricky through the park or requires walking in the park roadway or going out to Florissant Ave and then back in.

On to bicycling and driving. Cyclists can use the roadway so from that perspective their fine but I have serious issues with the bike rack selection and installation.

Architects love this bike rack design, even though it is a poor choice for securing a bike and most of the time they are installed incorrectly, as was the case here. When used as designed they can only secure the frame at one point, they should be loaded from both sides. The four racks shown here are designed to hold a total of 28 bikes. Another area with more of the same rack is to the left.

Better bikes racks would’ve been less expensive. Total failure on the part of the architects and/or client (city parks dept).

With the exception of the choice of bike rack and lack of connection to the O’Fallon Park boat house and adjacent tennis courts I’d say access is very good. It’s far better than trying to reach the sister facility in Carondelet Park from nearby neighborhoods.

— Steve Patterson

Readers Split On O’Fallon Park Controversy, Agreement Reached

When I posted last week’s poll on Sunday September 23rd it didn’t look like we were going to see progress toward getting the new $22 million O’Fallon Park Recreation Center open for business. Agreement was reached the next day, but political posturing didn’t end.

Monday September 24th – 1pm

One of the key items announced was “1300 low income kids will get $25 memberships at the O’Fallon Recreation Center.” This is $25 per year, not per month.  See the fact sheet here.

Ald. French was glad more specifics were formerly outlined in the documents — that was the goal. It just needed to get through the Board of Aldermen.

Friday September 28th

David Hunn of the Post-Dispatch reported the debate on the bill lasted for over an hour, with many in support:

Aldermen were not uniformly uncritical. Some worried about costs in years to come. Others complained that their wards lacked similarly updated facilities. Alderman Joe Roddy cautioned that the city was gaining a “champagne” appetite when what it really needed was inexpensive access for residents.

But only Alderman Steve Conway spoke fervently against French. He thought the 21st Ward alderman, who has been a paid campaign consultant for mayoral hopeful and board President Lewis Reed, delayed the center’s opening to make Slay look bad. (stltoday.com)

The bill passed, including a yes from Conway. The final vote will be this Friday October 5th. The facility should open by late this year or early 2013.

Q: Thoughts On The Not Yet Open O’Fallon Park Recreation Complex

1. The African-American Aldermanic Caucus is trying to make Slay look bad, helping Reed in 2013 27 [29.35%]
2. What about residents on the south side that can’t afford the new Carondelet YMCA? 25 [27.17%]
3. If we’re subsidizing 60% of the operating costs then the agreement with the YMCA should require at least a 60% discount for low-income residents 12 [13.04%]
4. We’re going to pay the YMCA $1.2 million per year to operate a building we spent $22 million to build? 10 [10.87%]
5. Unsure/no opinion 9 [9.78%]
6. Just sign the 10-year $12 million dollar deal, the YMCA will make sure low-income resident memberships are affordable 7 [7.61%]
7. Other: 2 [2.17%]

The two “other” answers were:

1. The deal is stupid, the city should manage the rec plex.
2.  What kind of idiot builds something that the intended customer can’t afford?

I see validity in Ald Roddy’s comments about champagne taste. The time to question it would’ve been 8 years ago when we voted to support the sales tax. In time these two large facilities will either be viewed as a great decision or a poor decision, it’s too soon to know.

— Steve Patterson

Poll: Thoughts On The Not Yet Open O’Fallon Park Recreation Complex

The $21-$22 million dollar O’Fallon Recreation Complex has been finished for a couple of months now but the facility remains closed.  This facility is the north side equal to the facility that opened in Carondelet Park on November 19, 2009:

The City of St. Louis wanted a new community recreation center on the City’s North Side to serve as a youth and elderly outreach facility, encouraging all ages to be engaged in the community. St. Louis City officials determined that there was significant interest in the North St. Louis area to support this new facility. The project is being funded by a one-eighth-cent sales tax approved by city voters in 2008.

The O’Fallon Park Recreation Complex is designed to achieve a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) Silver certification for environmental design and sustainability. “This new project shows the City’s commitment to improving the quality of life in North St. Louis,” says St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay. “This building will be an amenity for nearby neighborhoods and will provide a fun, safe place for children, adults and seniors to go after school and on weekends. It will help make the community healthier, and will help make our northside neighborhoods better places to live and work. The positive impact of this investment will be enjoyed by the community for years to come.” (St. Louis)

But the operating agreement between the city and the YMCA have yet to be approved.

Alderman Antonio French says Mayor Francis Slay has cut a bad deal for his residents. French says the contractor hired to run the facility — the YMCA — wants to charge his residents and the city government too much money, yet can’t assure him needy children will get in for next-to-free. (stltoday.com) 

And the other side:

Jeff Rainford, Slay’s chief of staff, calls the rec center project the mayor’s “baby” and says he’s not sure why French, who was previously happy with the YMCA’s fee schedule and management proposal, is suddenly holding up the bill. The YMCA says they’ll be able to open the center 90 days after the bill is approved.

“Halfway through, he pulled the bill and started criticizing the mayor,” says Rainford. “We want people to be able to use it. It’d be a crying shame to build this palace on the hill and no one can use it.”

Rainsford [sic] says there will be 1,300 guaranteed scholarships given to kids and their families, 650 will be distributed by the Boys & Girls Club of Greater St. Louis, which is supposed to partner with the Y to provide children’s activities. In order to obtain the lower $25 membership, parents will have to show cause for need and bring in a pay stub or W-2 form. (Riverfront Times)

One issue French told me is YMCA formula for calculating a lower fee, the YMCA says their formula is proprietary information. French says that’s fine for other facilities but not one built with tax money and receiving $1.2 million per year operating subsidy.

Right now both sides have dug in their heels:

The YMCA is lined up to operate the rec center. But city aldermen are raising concerns over a $1.2 million subsidy it would need. That’s $500,000 more per year than an estimate done eight years ago.

It’s not clear exactly where the money will come from.

Slay’s office says under a current plan, 1,300 young people would get a $25 dollar- a-year membership for the center.

Alderman Antonio French says he wants commitments in writing. (KMOV)

No shortage of options:

There’s been a lot of back-and-forthing about who would pay what to use the facility and what discounts might be offered to low-income families. Mr. French told us he’d be satisfied if low-income families paid 60 percent of the planned family rate of $55 a month, or $33 a month. If 5,000 low-income families took advantage of a $22-a-month discount, $110,000 a year would be needed.

Here’s a plan: If all the civic groups and corporations who have bemoaned the lack of recreational opportunities in north St. Louis bucked up, 110 grand would be easy.

Mayor Francis Slay’s office thinks Mr. French is playing politics. He is a paid consultant to Aldermanic President Lewis Reed, who might challenge Mr. Slay for his job next year. Opening a new rec center on the north side before the March primary election might benefit the Slay campaign. (stltoday.com editorial)

So what do you think? Take the poll in the right sidebar (mobile users need to switch to full website). Poll results on Wednesday October 3rd along with my thoughts on the controversy and a look at pedestrian access to the facility.

— Steve Patterson

Speed Bump Bill Hits a Bump in the Political Road

Recently the humble speed bump was elevated to a political issue, from MayorSlay.com:

“Today, I vetoed an odd little bill that would have paid for the installation of speed bumps in one of the city’s 105 parks. The bill’s sponsor ignored the testimony of the Streets Department that there were better and more effective ways to slow traffic and the opinion of the city counselor that such constructions are legally questionable under state and Federal law.

At my direction, the city’s operations director will work with the directors of the Parks and Streets Departments, the city’s chief engineer, the park’s users, and the bill’s sponsor to find appropriate, effective, and legal measures to calm traffic along that stretch of park road. If the issue is safety, not aldermanic courtesy, that will solve the problem.”

The sponsor was 21st ward alderman, Antonio French, a personal friend of many years. The bill was BB43.

I visited O’Fallon Park to check out the places where French wanted speed bumps, namely two points where the newish jogging trail crossing the main internal road in the park. I can certainly see why he wanted something to slow traffic, neither crossing point is marked other than two faint crosswalk lines.

The phrase “speed bump” doesn’t really apply in the case of O’Fallon Park, speed hump is better:

Speed humps are rounded raised areas placed across the roadway. They are generally 10 to 14 feet long (in the direction of travel), making them distinct from the shorter “speed bumps” found in many parking lots, and are 3 to 4 inches high. The profile of a speed hump can be circular, parabolic, or sinusoidal. They are often tapered as they reach the curb on each end to allow unimpeded drainage.

They are both inexpensive and effective.  But the mayor questioned the legality in his blog post on the veto:

The mayor is referring to the recommendation he received from the city counselor’s office, which told him in a statement, “since speed bumps are not explicitly permitted in [Missouri Statutes section] 304.120, they logically fall under the category of prohibited obstructions in [section] 229.030.” The counselor’s office goes on to state that the speed bumps would create additional legal liability for the City. (RFT)

At the request of the Post-Dispatch, the local [MoDOT] office researched state law on the issue, and found no reference whatsoever to speed “bumps,” which are in parking lots, or “humps,” which are in streets, said Traffic Operations Engineer Brian Umfleet.

And the law, Umfleet said today, typically spells out what is illegal. Roundabouts, for instance, aren’t in state law either. Nor are some of the newer, fancier traffic-control methods, such as the “Diverging Diamond,” at Dorsett Road and Interstate 270 – yet MoDOT builds those, too. (STLtoday.com)

How could these crossings have only two narrow crosswalk lines and no signs at all? I wondered if this was the norm so at first I visited O’Fallon’s south side counterpart, Carondelet Park.

The crosswalks in Carondelet Park are significantly more visible than the standard crosswalk markings in O’Fallon Park.

I personally prefer the Zebra or Ladder styles of crosswalk markings.

It would appear the city skimped on pedestrian safety when the jogging path was completed in O’Fallon Park, relative to Carondelet Park at least.  Forest Park uses textured pavement near such crossings to slow traffic, in addition to warning signs. It amazes me French had to introduce a bill and have the mayor veto the bill over something that should have been included with the original installation of the jogging path.

– Steve Patterson