Forest Park Forever Seeks to Alter Government Hill…Forever

You may not know the name Government Hill but you know the view, look up toward the World’s Fair Pavilion. Classical cascading terraces and a couple of fountains. It has been a favorite St. Louis backdrop picture for decades. Forest Park Forever, wants to “obliterate” the existing landscape design and do something “fresh.” Last night they sought approval from the Preservation Board.

The Preservation Board’s role in the parks is strictly that as an advisor, they do not have any veto power over projects. The board seemed to like the new design but not in place of the old design. Kate Shea, director of Cultural Resources, read from the Forest Park Master Plan about intentions around repair and restoration and grand park facilities. Indeed, much of the park has been restored and maybe embellished. Areas like the grand basin were not recreated into something entirely different from the original. The Preservation Board deferred a decision and asked Forest Park Forever to reconsider.

In testimony it was discovered the costs of restoring the classical features would be roughly the same as the new proposal. Part of the issue is making the hill accessible (aka ADA ramps). Forest Park Forever has a plan for adding ADA accessible ramps on the outer edges of the existing classical layout but they seem too smitten by their new zig-zag scheme.

For pictures of the existing and proposed look through the Preservation Board agenda on this item.

I testified briefly to raise functional concerns. I’ve attended events at the World’s Fair Pavilion where the first terrace down the hill was used in conjunction with events in the Pavilion. The new scheme places terraces much further down the hill. I also said that whatever plan was built, the materials need to last 90 years, the length of the proposed new BJC lease of part of Forest Park in exchange for a maintenance trust fund.

The next step in the process is a Forest Park Advisory Committee meeting on July 20, 2006.

– Steve

Thoughts on Civil Rights & Gay Pride

This weekend is the big Pride celebration in St. Louis. Two days of festivities in Tower Grove park along with a parade down Grand beginning at noon on Sunday. I’ll probably go, I always do.

I “came out” as we say back when I was just 16 years old. If you are trying to do the math that would have been back in 1983. AIDS was just becoming an issue, although it would be two years later before President Reagan would publicly say “AIDS.”

I became somewhat of an activist in college as a co-chair of the University of Oklahoma Gay-Lesbian Alliance. We, as a group, participated in Oklahoma City’s first ever gay pride parade in 1988. The parade, thankfully, went off without any trouble as was feared by many.

I recall one weekend in the early 90’s where I was in Kansas City for their pride weekend and I returned to St. Louis to catch the parade in St. Louis — down Euclid and ending in Forest Park at the time.

1993 was the best year for me, the March on Washington. Some said we were a million strong. It seemed like it, everywhere you turned in Washington D.C. was someone gay or lesbian. At the time we were not as inclusive as to include those who are bisexual or transgendered. I’m sure they were there.

At the time the big issue was gays in the military, like somehow that was a new thing. 1993 was the year we got the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Policy” that is still in effect.

My best memory of the entire event was my college friend Richard and I hearing the fabulous Eartha Kitt on the load speaker. By the time we made it across the mall to the stage she was done with her performance.

When I came out at 16 my big fears were getting beaten up (or killed) and AIDS. I’ve avoided both, thankfully. I never imagined, at the time, discussions of gays serving in the military, civil unions, and marriage. Although still hostile, the world is certainly a better place today with respect to gay rights.

Happy Pride weekend everyone!

– Steve

Flamingo Bowl To Get Flashy Marquee Sign

Developer and entrepreneur Joe Edwards is expanding his magic touch beyond the Delmar Loop. Soon to open will be an instantly trendy new bowling alley, the Flamingo Bowl. Wednesday he appeared before the Board of Adjustment to appeal a routine denial of a sign permit. His proposed sign did not meet the standard criteria.

The Board of Adjustment is pretty conservative when it comes to signs, perhaps a good thing. They try to avoid strobe lights and reader board that are generally considered to be too tacky and possibly overly distracting to drivers. Edwards’ proposed sign will have features like signs at his other establishments such as Blueberry Hill and The Pageant. Namely, it will have a reader board to announce upcoming bands performing at the bowling alley (yes, live music while bowling!).

But reader boards are one of those no-nos except in rare cases. Board members were stumped when trying to think of a reader board on Washington Avenue — almost to the point where I thought they’d say no to this feature. I didn’t want to testify in this issue but I could easily think of one — the convention center.

I briefly got a glimpse of the proposed sign for Flamingo Bowl but what I saw looked very interesting. Thankfully they approved his sign request. I think this will be a great addition to Washington Avenue, helping draw visitors westward along Washington Ave from the convention center.

I welcome the return of the artistic and expensive lighted sign.

– Steve

Board of Adjustment Upholds Conditional Use for McDonald’s Drive-Thru

Today the city’s Board of Adjustment upheld the earlier decision to grant a conditional use permit to allow a drive-thru to McDonald’s on the former Sears site.

I’ve got a lot of things I want to say but I’ve pledged not to use that kind of language here. So, I’ll just say this for now:

With development like this, I have serious reservations about the ability of the City of St. Louis to reach its full potential.

– Steve

Our Interstates At 50: A Midlife Crisis?

Tomorrow the Missouri Department of Transportation will be holding a pro-highway construction love fest in Columbia MO. The event, Our Interstates At 50: A Midlife Crisis Public Policy Forum, is predictably going to tell us why we need the road equivalent of a fancy new sports car, hair implants and young trophy spouse.

JEFFERSON CITY – Retired U.S. Gen. and NBC News Analyst Barry McCaffrey will join state and national transportation leaders in a discussion about the past, present and future of Missouri’s interstate system at a public policy forum scheduled for June 22 at the University of Missouri-Columbia. McCaffrey, a national infrastructure expert who also serves as HNTB Federal Services Chairman, will speak at 12:30 p.m.

The forum, sponsored by the Missouri Department of Transportation and the university’s Harry S Truman School of Public Affairs, is being held in conjunction with the 50th anniversary of the nation’s interstates.

What is really telling is the list of panel sessions and who they’ve invited as panelists. Don’t look for any smart growth folks or someone from the Sierra Club!

The Impact of the Interstate Highway System; Moderator: Bob Priddy, Missourinet

Panelists:
• Mary Ann Naber, Federal Highway Administration
• Allen Masuda, Federal Highway Administration
• Bill Ankner, Missouri Transportation Institute
• Charlie Nemmers, UMC College of Engineering

The Interstates Today: Where We Are, Where We Need To Be; Moderator: Jerry Mugg, HNTB

Panelists:
• Frank Moretti, TRIP (The Road Information Program)
• Marty Romitti, Missouri Economic Research and Information Center, Department of Economic Development
• Hal Kassoff, Parsons Brinckerhoff

The Future of the Interstate: Strategies for Success; Moderator: Kevin Keith, MoDOT

Panelists:
• Mary Peters, HDR Incorporated
• Shirley Ybarra, Ybarra Group
• Bob Heitmann, Zachry American Infrastructure
• Daniel L. Rust, Center for Transportation Studies, UMSL
• Chris Gutierrez, Kansas City SmartPort

Look for them all to congratulate each other and to those prior generations for being so forward thinking. Then they will tell us we are facing a critical situation and need to invest billions more in our highway infrastructure. We bought it 50 years ago based on the Cold War and being able to evacuate the cities quickly in case of nuclear threat. Of course, we did evacuate our cities just over a period of several decades.

You can read the two-page press release here.

Speaking of billions on highway projects, have you heard about the new highway from Mexico to Canada????

A MASSIVE road four football fields wide and running from Mexico to Canada through the heartland of the United States is being proposed amid controversy over security and the damage to the environment.

The “nation’s most modern roadway”, proposed between Laredo in Texas and Duluth, Minnesota, along Interstate 35, would allow the US to bypass the west coast ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to import goods from China and the Far East into the heart of middle America via Mexico, saving both cost and time.

According to the article in the Scotsman, construction may start on the Texas portion as early as next year.

The Texas section, called the Trans-Texas Corridor, would create separate lanes for trucking as well as provide rail corridor for passenger & freight service. To me this smacks of road interests teaming up with the trucking industry to “invest” in our future. The entire necessary right of way exceeds 1,000ft. That is huge! Out in corn fields it is no big deal I suppose but as you approach urbanized areas, such as along I-35, you are going to cause major problems.

From the anti Trans-Texas Corridor site CorridorWatch:

The Corridor plan is designed to provide transportation funds, more than transportation. Rather than identify specific transportation needs and offer solutions, the Plan defines funding as the need and the Corridor as the solution. Accordingly it’s not important where the Corridor is built, as long as it generates revenue.

Likely a valid point. I think many big projects these days are designed around funding more so than actually need to solve a problem.

– Steve