Friday editorial: Top shelf
We’re susceptible here in St. Louis to what might be called “fix-a-phobia” — a nervous condition caused by deep and sometimes justified concern that civic decisions are preordained by the community’s power elite.
The ongoing effort to rethink public access between downtown and the Gateway Arch and consideration of how people use the Arch grounds have caused an outbreak of fix-a-phobia in the community. Given history, the concern is understandable, but it seems misplaced.
There is broad consensus that access to the Arch and the riverfront is an embarrassment, even a risk to public safety. Walking to the Arch from downtown requires dodging traffic on the six lanes of Memorial Drive at a few constricted intersections high above the depressed lanes of Interstate 70. The process can make pedestrians feel like video game “Froggers.”
Former Sen. John Danforth and his family foundation are advocating a “transformational” change that reenergizes the Arch as a local and national symbol and gathering place. Part of that change would include radically improved public access to the Arch grounds and part would involve creation of a new “destination attraction” on the Arch grounds to bring more visitors to St. Louis. He and his allies have proposed a three-block pedestrian “lid” bridging the depressed lanes and Memorial Drive.
There appears to be widespread acceptance of the concept of the lid among local leaders; less so the concept of the as-yet-unspecified attraction, at least not yet. The National Park Service — the mission of which is the preservation and protection of the national parks, monuments and other entities over which it has stewardship — has reservations about it. And within the local architectural and planning community, there is some concern that the lid itself might not be the best way to solve the problem of access to the Arch grounds.
• Local planner and blogger Rick Bonasch, for example, has laid out a detailed case for coordinating the planning of improved access to the Arch with construction of the new Mississippi River bridge north of downtown. In his blog STL Rising he argues for a major remaking of Memorial Drive and the depressed lanes of I-70 as a tree-lined boulevard with easy pedestrian crossings.
• Urbanist Steve Patterson advances a similar proposal in his widely read blog, Urban Review STL, suggesting that “a little bridge or a lid over the highway just isn’t enough.”
• Les Sterman, executive director of the East-West Gateway Council of Governments, agrees “in principle” with these commentators and that the ideal solution is to broadly reconfigure Memorial Drive/I-70, but doubts whether this is “realistic or doable.” Mr. Sterman said he would “love to be proven wrong.”
The Park Service has begun a process to revise its “general management plan.” Up for consideration is how to “improve and enhance pedestrian connections from the city into the park” and to “increase opportunities for new and enhanced connections to adjacent neighborhoods, the riverfront and the Gateway Mall.”
The agency recently held two open houses at which the public was invited to consider and comment on ideas for improving access to the Arch grounds and revising the overall management plan. A Park Service spokesman said those sessions were designed to prime the pump and generate reaction, refinements and additional proposals — not to foreclose other possibilities.
Federal planners won’t meet for at least another month, and their draft plan isn’t expected to be published until the end of 2008 or early 2009. It will be posted for public comment, with a revised and final plan not forthcoming until the spring or summer of 2009. At most, the management plan will endorse concepts, not specifics.
If it concludes that improved connections are needed, a second planning process then would address what better access should look like. In short, there’s still time for sharp thinkers and innovative ideas. But they must get into the process. And they should be welcomed.
Mr. Danforth has done the region a great service by bringing the discussion this far. The bigger question is whether our region has — and can sustain — the civic will, energy and imagination to get it done.
Update: Here is KWMU commentary KWMU commentary on the subject by Michael Allen of the Landmarks Association of St. Louis.
(Pictured: The depressed section of Interstate 70 near the Gateway Arch grounds Tuesday in St. Louis. Huy Richard Mach | Post-Dispatch).
“The bigger question is whether our region has — and can sustain — the civic will, energy and imagination to get it done.”
The answer to that question should be obvious. It’s no.
“Local planner and blogger Rick Bonasch, for example, has laid out a detailed case for coordinating the planning of improved access to the Arch with construction of the new Mississippi River bridge north of downtown.”
You mean 20 years from now when, or if, that bridge actually gets built? Hahahahahahaha.
“In his blog STL Rising he argues for a major remaking of Memorial Drive and the depressed lanes of I-70 as a tree-lined boulevard with easy pedestrian crossings.”
Sounds like Utopia. Hey, maybe they could hand out $20 to everyone who crosses it as a “Thank You” for coming to the city. Here’s an idea…Why not fix things that really need fixing? Start with that hole in the ground near the ballpark. Then move on to replacing a few of the bridges that will crumble to the ground the next time a drop of rain falls and a bit of wind blows. Start with the Kingshighway bridge north of Southwest Ave. Those two tasks alone will take over 10 years and will both be over budget.
“Mr. Danforth has done the region a great service by bringing the discussion this far.”
Oh yea!?!, he’s essentially done what every other suit has done. Talk. There are no leaders, or doers, in this town. We have people who like to talk the talk and then try to line their pockets. I can remember going to a big event at Forest Park regarding the remake of the riverfront. Nothing came from that either. This too shall pass.
St. Louis can get nothing accomplished because the populus has no faith in them or their abilities. Unlike a mutual fund, past performance is an indicator of future results.
When it comes to this city trying to do anything I’m neither an optimist or pessimist. I’m a realist. If there were more like that, maybe something would change.