Improving the Urban Wall Around Citygarden, Part 1

The new Citygarden, a 2-block sculpture garden in downtown St. Louis, is a wonderful space.  The surrounding buildings are not so wonderful.  For the long-term viability of the area we need to improve the urban edge around Citygarden.

Across Market Street to the South is the first place I’d start, the Bank of America tower.  A horrible Urban Renewal era building with no relationship to the sidewalk.  The building is mostly in the 800 block of Market St but the base of the tower extends over 9th St with part of the building in the 900 block.

Above is looking West from Market St at 8th.  The raised terrace is the main disconnect between the sidewalk and building.  In a walkable environment you want minimal separation between the pedestrian on the sidewalk and entrances to interior spaces.  Each city block needs 4-6 distinct entries to make the journey interesting for the pedestrian.  Razing the building and starting over would work but it would be wasteful and is not necessary.

Plants can do wonders.  If they replaced the boring ivy with something that would drape over the wall that would do wonders.  Lose the button down collar look in the planter.  Replace serious with fun.  The first block of the Citygarden is to the right, across Market St.

Above: we are approaching 9th Street.  The sign up on the terrace is for a restaurant space for lease.  Yeah, good luck with that.  To make it work you’d need a sign & menu board down at the sidewalk level.  Some potted plants on the steps (away from the rails) would soften these stairs and make it more inviting.  The brass handrails are like shoulder pads on the show Dynasty: classy at the time but oh so dated now.

Above: At 9th looking back East at the opposite view of the steps.  A step down planter on this end attempts to mask the huge change in height above the sidewalk but the plantings are too wimpy for the massive space.  Like the retaining wall earlier the plantings should hang over the wall and vary in height.  Some color would be nice too.

Above: 9th Street looking South.  Just horrible. I can see guests of the hotel 2 blocks South using this route to get to Citygarden.   Removing the section over the street is ideal but not likely.  So I look for alternatives to improve this street.

Four lanes?  Four!  Insanity.  Thankfully Citygarden cuts this down to two after crossing Market Street. Ideally I’d put on-street parking on the two outer lanes.  But I’m guessing they don’t want vehicles parking under the building here.  Fine, but we still only need two travel lanes.  The sidewalks should be widened so that only two lanes remain.  The section of the building between 9th & 10th at grade is the drive thru.  A blank wall faces Market St & 10th concealing the drive-thru.  That is both good & bad.  Good because we don’t want to see a drive-thru in a city but bad because blank walls are no better.

Above: Continuing along Market St we see the blank wall along the side of KSDK channel 5.  To the left we see open space.  Yes, the trees are nice and the grass is green but this space, across Market St from the 2nd block of Citygarden is screaming out for a building(s).

Are our Elected Officials Competent?

First, in the realm of full disclosure, I spent 5 years as an elected member of a quasi-governmental transit agency, first being appointed to fill a vacancy, then running and being elected to a four-year term.

When our country was founded, the framers of the constitution did not envision professional politicians. Elected officials were expected to serve limited terms for little or no compensation, taking a leave from their farms or mercantile operations to do so. Over the last 230 years, things have changed, sometimes substantially, and there no longer is only one way of having a legislative body. Most traditional bodies continue to deal with a broad range of issues, everything from finances and taxes to land use and urban design to criminalizing texting while driving and having saggy pants. We’ve also seen the rise of many specialized districts and boards, covering everything from fire protection and water and sewers to schools, transit and “improvement” districts.

In pretty much every case, there are few, if any requirements for running or being appointed to a position, other than a minimum age, residency requirements and/or being a citizen. There rarely, if ever, is any sort of requirement that you be educated in, or even actually understand, what you’ll be voting on and rejecting or approving. A farmer can approve a multi-million dollar highway bond package and a teacher can approve a union contract or the purchase of 3,000 tires for a transit agency.

Our tradition is to elect generalists to office, and our pay structure is all over the map. In many positions, compensation can best be defined as “token” – you either have to be retired or comfortable in your “real” job (and able to take time off) to be able to serve. Working stiffs need not apply, especially if your boss (or spouse) won’t give you the time off to serve. A few bodies do pay “living wages” to the people elected to serve on them. St. Louis’ Board of Alderman is in kind of a gray area – it pays well enough for a part-time job, but not enough for it to be a full-time one for many folks.

In a roundabout way, this gets us back to the original question, especially when it comes to our Board of Aldermen. It’s very much a traditional body, and its makeup of 27 members should guarantee enough diversity in expertise (the Law of Large Numbers) to be able to cover almost any topic. Unfortunately, this is counteracted by both the tradition of Aldermanic courtesy, where each ward acts very autonomously, and the tradition that the Democratic party selects candidates more for their loyalty and hard than for their expertise.

Bottom line, there is no consistent answer. We have good people serving for very little money and we have mediocre, or worse, people showing up just to collect a paycheck and enjoy having the power. We have bodies that work well together, building on their individual members’ strengths and hiring and listening to good professional staff. We have bodies that are essentially dysfunctional and either ineffective or counterproductive. And we have bodies that can fit either description, depending on who won in the last election! It’s something nobody can legislate, but it is something we can all impact, by supporting the best candidates AND by staying involved and vocal after the election is over . . .

– Jim Zavist