Bob Cassilly has become a rich man by finding things abandoned in the city, reclaiming them, and incorporating into the structure of the City Museum.
When a construction project has too much concrete, and the pourers have to pay to dispose of it. It is cheaper to just give it to people who can put it to good use.
Shoe chutes make great slides,
Airplanes can stay in the air,
Shredded parachutes can totally change a cieling,
How about a fire truck?
A school bus?
Is there room for an old ferris wheel?
There are still several floors of the building that are not being used. The adjoining building is also doing little more than acting as storage for the museum's strange collections. All urban explorers that visit St. Louis hope to make it into the hat room--Millions of Hats!
Some of the space in the city museum building that people do not see regularly is filled with expensive lofts designed by Bob Cassilly himself. Who wouldn't want to live in such a space?
Like most people, I'd love to see the City Museum grow like a cancer across several blocks consuming and repurposing things left and right. I'd love to see Metro retire their buses and trains to the City Museum as they are phased out. Imagine a train on the side of the building acting as an elevator shaft. Imagine a stair case made out of bus seats. They could be stacked up and fused together into larger super structures serving as apartments and office spaces. Maybe we could put some retired Amtrak dining cars back in service.
In London, there's a group called Village Underground that has managed to put a few retired 'carriages' from the London Underground onto the top of a building to provide cheap studio space. What urban artist wouldn't want to work in such a place?
The ideas that inspired this are hardly that different from the St. Louis City Museum. Granted, Cassilly started with wanting to build a giant aquarium..., but the recycling of urban structures into usable space is still a great venture. Enjoy this video,
Also, consider the uses of subway cars as churches and mobile homes as hotel rooms.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
Lambert International Airport / Memphis International Airport
Lambert International Airport in St. Louis is a massively underused facility. It is so empty, it easily accomodated a film crew for George Clooney's recent film.
The airport has a pretty big footprint.
It was once the hub for TWA, but that's all over now. A new runway was built for them, but they fell apart. Lambert has been losing flights ever since. There used to be some airforce fighters there. They changed to B-2 Spirits, and then flew away to an airbase close to Kansas City.
What's happening at the airport? There are fewer passenger flights and fewer military flights, so who is using the new runway? It must be cargo, right? That's what our civic leaders think.
St. Louis has seen some interesting political developments around the future of its main airport. As it is operating below its possible capacity, any new business that wants to move in could do so pretty cheaply. A while back, we saw the two senators from Missouri rush off with the mayor of St. Louis City and the St. Louis County Executive to Washington DC to meet with Chinese officials about a new cargo hub at Lambert Airport.
St. Louis is a natural point of distribution with good highway and rail access, rivers too. We're the Wuhan of North America. Money has been slowly pooling at all levels of government to push for this. It looks possible.
It would certainly change the American freight map if China moved its goods by air rather than ships.
There is another airport very close to St. Louis with an incredible amount of logistic skill. Why shouldn't China send its goods there?
Look at what FedEx has made out of the Memphis International Airport,
View Larger Map
Memphis is a fascinating case study in urban development. The city is small with a metro population about half the size of St. Louis'. By specializing, it has managed to secure its position as the largest cargo hub in the world. The airport has started to sprawl out and consume local subdivisions, not for runways and hotels like a traditional passenger hub, but for warehouses: vast empty buildings with low economic activity.
Carol Coletta of CEOs for Cities is from Memphis but now lives in Chicago. In a conversation on the Passenger vs. Cargo model, she said,
... a market where fares are typically high (regional hubs where competition is low) discourages the location of professional services, especially those who must travel. I have experienced this personally. While our organization is headquartered in Chicago (cheap market, lots of airline competition), we had an employee in Memphis. We didn't want to send her anywhere because it was enormously expensive (usually 3x our fares out of Chicago). I just traded Memphis for DC as an employee location. Guess what happened to my travel costs? They plunged. So runways for freight may be an economic advantage (although FedEx, while itself providing lots of good paying jobs, has spawned a lot of land-eating, low-pay warehouses in Memphis), I would like to have competitive airfares for highly paid knowledge economy workers.
so while having a cargo hub is great for attracting companies in the logistics industry, it isn't necessarily the best for the city overall. A good passenger airport, like O'Hare that offers cheap fares around the world and good ground service by subway and Amtrak, is better for attracting businesses that need mobile workers.
A cargo airport needs altogether different facilities like truck depots, warehouses, freight trains, and barges.
Lambert Airport is trapped between three highways, and that's a pretty good boundary. The residential neighborhoods there probably have a sense that they might one day be bought out. Airport hotels, warehouses, and hangers take up a lot of room and we naturally hope the airport continues to grow.
I lived in Singapore for a time, and I grew to admire their geopolitical position.
Just looking at a map, it is instantly clear why the British Empire ruled the seas. They held Suez and Singapore. Any traffic at all between the Indian and Pacific Oceans must pass through Singapore. Historically when the monsoon winds blew one way, the Indians came. When the winds blew another way, the Indians went home and the Chinese arrived. The winds reversed, and the Chinese left as the Indians returned. Singapore sat between as an entrepĂ´t. They used their warehouses to excellent effect. Present day Singapore has nothing going for it but its geographic position and its skilled citizens. Leveraging their position, they made themselves into an Asian Tiger. Changi Airport hosts three local passenger airlines in addition to being the 10th busiest cargo hub in the world. Somehow it manages to hold both distinctions. There are fine hotels and massive warehouses. Passengers can take the subway or the bus. Cargo can hop to a container ship.
St. Louis should learn from what isn't so great about Memphis and what seems to work for Singapore. Traffic must be two way--a cargo hub that sends the planes back empty doesn't work. A metro airport that can't get citizens to and from the places they need to go also doesn't work.
I hope that St. Louis can strike a balance as well.
A cargo deal with China has interesting prospects. Academically, UMSL is almost immediately adjacent to the Lambert Airport. UMSL's transportation studies program seems like a natural partner. Between UMSL and Wash U is a joint East Asian Studies center that seems destined to grow. Webster has multiple foreign campuses in China. Part of the drive for this Chinese Cargo Hub designation has been done through the auspices of Sister City Relations and institutions like the Missouri Botanical Gardens. Everyone on the St. Louis side is banking on this yielding more than just freight.
An international business community between St. Louis and China would be beneficial to the passenger side of the airport.
I've lived abroad for some time, and I have flown in and out of the US through Chicago instead of my hometown for the reasons Carol mentioned. If a good cargo deal generated enough good will to get a regular direct flight between St. Louis and an East Asian city, I would be grateful.
The airport has a pretty big footprint.
It was once the hub for TWA, but that's all over now. A new runway was built for them, but they fell apart. Lambert has been losing flights ever since. There used to be some airforce fighters there. They changed to B-2 Spirits, and then flew away to an airbase close to Kansas City.
What's happening at the airport? There are fewer passenger flights and fewer military flights, so who is using the new runway? It must be cargo, right? That's what our civic leaders think.
St. Louis has seen some interesting political developments around the future of its main airport. As it is operating below its possible capacity, any new business that wants to move in could do so pretty cheaply. A while back, we saw the two senators from Missouri rush off with the mayor of St. Louis City and the St. Louis County Executive to Washington DC to meet with Chinese officials about a new cargo hub at Lambert Airport.
St. Louis is a natural point of distribution with good highway and rail access, rivers too. We're the Wuhan of North America. Money has been slowly pooling at all levels of government to push for this. It looks possible.
It would certainly change the American freight map if China moved its goods by air rather than ships.
There is another airport very close to St. Louis with an incredible amount of logistic skill. Why shouldn't China send its goods there?
Look at what FedEx has made out of the Memphis International Airport,
View Larger Map
Memphis is a fascinating case study in urban development. The city is small with a metro population about half the size of St. Louis'. By specializing, it has managed to secure its position as the largest cargo hub in the world. The airport has started to sprawl out and consume local subdivisions, not for runways and hotels like a traditional passenger hub, but for warehouses: vast empty buildings with low economic activity.
Carol Coletta of CEOs for Cities is from Memphis but now lives in Chicago. In a conversation on the Passenger vs. Cargo model, she said,
... a market where fares are typically high (regional hubs where competition is low) discourages the location of professional services, especially those who must travel. I have experienced this personally. While our organization is headquartered in Chicago (cheap market, lots of airline competition), we had an employee in Memphis. We didn't want to send her anywhere because it was enormously expensive (usually 3x our fares out of Chicago). I just traded Memphis for DC as an employee location. Guess what happened to my travel costs? They plunged. So runways for freight may be an economic advantage (although FedEx, while itself providing lots of good paying jobs, has spawned a lot of land-eating, low-pay warehouses in Memphis), I would like to have competitive airfares for highly paid knowledge economy workers.
so while having a cargo hub is great for attracting companies in the logistics industry, it isn't necessarily the best for the city overall. A good passenger airport, like O'Hare that offers cheap fares around the world and good ground service by subway and Amtrak, is better for attracting businesses that need mobile workers.
A cargo airport needs altogether different facilities like truck depots, warehouses, freight trains, and barges.
Lambert Airport is trapped between three highways, and that's a pretty good boundary. The residential neighborhoods there probably have a sense that they might one day be bought out. Airport hotels, warehouses, and hangers take up a lot of room and we naturally hope the airport continues to grow.
I lived in Singapore for a time, and I grew to admire their geopolitical position.
Just looking at a map, it is instantly clear why the British Empire ruled the seas. They held Suez and Singapore. Any traffic at all between the Indian and Pacific Oceans must pass through Singapore. Historically when the monsoon winds blew one way, the Indians came. When the winds blew another way, the Indians went home and the Chinese arrived. The winds reversed, and the Chinese left as the Indians returned. Singapore sat between as an entrepĂ´t. They used their warehouses to excellent effect. Present day Singapore has nothing going for it but its geographic position and its skilled citizens. Leveraging their position, they made themselves into an Asian Tiger. Changi Airport hosts three local passenger airlines in addition to being the 10th busiest cargo hub in the world. Somehow it manages to hold both distinctions. There are fine hotels and massive warehouses. Passengers can take the subway or the bus. Cargo can hop to a container ship.
St. Louis should learn from what isn't so great about Memphis and what seems to work for Singapore. Traffic must be two way--a cargo hub that sends the planes back empty doesn't work. A metro airport that can't get citizens to and from the places they need to go also doesn't work.
I hope that St. Louis can strike a balance as well.
A cargo deal with China has interesting prospects. Academically, UMSL is almost immediately adjacent to the Lambert Airport. UMSL's transportation studies program seems like a natural partner. Between UMSL and Wash U is a joint East Asian Studies center that seems destined to grow. Webster has multiple foreign campuses in China. Part of the drive for this Chinese Cargo Hub designation has been done through the auspices of Sister City Relations and institutions like the Missouri Botanical Gardens. Everyone on the St. Louis side is banking on this yielding more than just freight.
An international business community between St. Louis and China would be beneficial to the passenger side of the airport.
I've lived abroad for some time, and I have flown in and out of the US through Chicago instead of my hometown for the reasons Carol mentioned. If a good cargo deal generated enough good will to get a regular direct flight between St. Louis and an East Asian city, I would be grateful.
Posted by
Daron
7
comments
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Minority St. Louis / Majority New Orleans
A few things have converged in my head that I'd like to share.
1. Portland may be a great city, all planned out and pretty, but much of that can be blamed on its lack of diversity. A mostly white, middle class city lacks some of the problems of a segregated city with great disparities in personal income.
2. Cities should look for organic home-grown solutions and not try to transplant what works in another city bluntly onto a pre-existing social order. What works in Portland probably wouldn't work in Atlanta in exactly the same way.
3. Black Urban Professionals (in contrast to young urban professionals) have very interesting migratory patterns. They do not move to Portland.
4. While there are strong black communities in many Rust Belt cities, there is no place particularly known as a mecca of educated black talent. Atlanta is strong, but there is room for any city to improve in this regard.
There's a map showing 2000 census data on wikipedia,
There is clearly a clustering of majority black communities along the Mississippi River between Memphis and New Orleans. This clustering is along I-55, which continues north to St. Louis and on to Chicago.
This map is from 2000, and we should be aware that Katrina heavily modified the demographics of New Orleans. Where did the people go? The 2010 census will tell us.
Weak research (a lazy glance at wikipedia) shows that St. Louis was 51% black and 43% white in 2000. By 2007, we were 50% black and 47% white. Other minorities have not disappeared, the population increased. Outside of St. Louis City, the suburbs are mostly white. Any infill at all, which will probably happen, will tip the city majority white. What effect would that have?
New Orleans was 67% black in 2000. The hurricane reduced its total population by 40%. Who stayed? Most accounts say the white people left. New Orleans is now slowly regaining its population, but who's moving in? Again, most people say white people--young and talented.
We can see here on page 7 that the New Orleans Disapora mainly went to Suburban New Orleans, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, and Baton Rouge. Isn't it strange that Memphis is not mentioned. Houston, Dallas, and Atlanta are the three big Southern cities. They're kind of obvious choices for shared cultural identity, and perhaps family/personal connections.
This is a map based on the initial exodus and 40,000 internet "I'm safe in *****" posts.
I'm under the impression that Saint Louis University got a lot of Loyola students at the time out of Jesuit brotherhood.
How many permanent relocations did we get?
I-55 is a great conveyor of people from one place to another. The percent black map sure seems to make it seem like a natural corridor for cultural connections. Yet, there is that great gulf between Memphis and St. Louis. A black woman in Cape Girardeau was arrested and sentenced essentially for cutting in line at a grocery store and then disrespecting a police officer (who she said was seriously disrespecting her).
Yet, Girardeau is French. So is St. Gen. New Orleans was French, and so was St. Louis.
New Orleans is known for Mardi Gras. St. Louis claims to have the second best Mardi Gras. New Orleans was the jewel of the Louisiana Purchase. We were the capital of the Louisiana Territory. They have a Saint Louis Cathedral, and so do we. There used to be a cultural link.
Our demographics have shifted. St. Louis got a lot of Germans.
So what about our current demographic link?
It looks like African American out-migration from Missouri before 2000 did largely go down I-55 to Arkansas. Also telling is the Illinois population, which is high in Mississippi, Tennessee, and Arkansas. I-55 is a great conveyor of people, but they were largely south-bound in the late 90s.
Of the New Great Migration, Atlanta sure seems like a rising star. With a 2007 metro population of 5,376,285 that's 31.2 % black, which means 1,677,400 African-Americans in one place.
The metro population of New Orleans is only 1,167,294 by comparison.
As the New Orleans disapora settles, the Detroit disaspora is just underway. In 2000, Detroit was 81.6% black. Where do the people go? Chicago? Atlanta?
The main university in Jefferson City is Lincoln University, an historically black college. The closest university to downtown St. Louis is Harris-Stowe University, a desegregated black college merged with a white college. St. Louis, and Missouri, have the potential to play in this migratory game.
I'm very curious to explore the how, why, and to what effect.
The 2010 census will also redraw the electoral college. If the south has indeed gained population, their votes may weigh more heavily. If, as Paul Krugman's The Conscious of Liberal suggests, the Republican party has largely placed its political chips on southern racism, and the south gets more diverse, then future presidential elections are at stake. African-Americans vote 90% democrat. There's no need to worry about Michigan and Illinois, big cities vote democrat too.
Georgia gained almost 2,000,000 people between 2000 and 2010. The state is 30% black.
In the 2008 election it was 1,844,123 votes for Obama and 2,048,759 votes for McCain. A difference of 200,000 votes isn't so much. Indications are that Georgia should be a different state by 2012. With its increase in population, its electoral votes will probably jump up from 15 too.
This is what the Olympics can bring?
1. Portland may be a great city, all planned out and pretty, but much of that can be blamed on its lack of diversity. A mostly white, middle class city lacks some of the problems of a segregated city with great disparities in personal income.
2. Cities should look for organic home-grown solutions and not try to transplant what works in another city bluntly onto a pre-existing social order. What works in Portland probably wouldn't work in Atlanta in exactly the same way.
3. Black Urban Professionals (in contrast to young urban professionals) have very interesting migratory patterns. They do not move to Portland.
4. While there are strong black communities in many Rust Belt cities, there is no place particularly known as a mecca of educated black talent. Atlanta is strong, but there is room for any city to improve in this regard.
There's a map showing 2000 census data on wikipedia,
There is clearly a clustering of majority black communities along the Mississippi River between Memphis and New Orleans. This clustering is along I-55, which continues north to St. Louis and on to Chicago.
This map is from 2000, and we should be aware that Katrina heavily modified the demographics of New Orleans. Where did the people go? The 2010 census will tell us.
Weak research (a lazy glance at wikipedia) shows that St. Louis was 51% black and 43% white in 2000. By 2007, we were 50% black and 47% white. Other minorities have not disappeared, the population increased. Outside of St. Louis City, the suburbs are mostly white. Any infill at all, which will probably happen, will tip the city majority white. What effect would that have?
New Orleans was 67% black in 2000. The hurricane reduced its total population by 40%. Who stayed? Most accounts say the white people left. New Orleans is now slowly regaining its population, but who's moving in? Again, most people say white people--young and talented.
We can see here on page 7 that the New Orleans Disapora mainly went to Suburban New Orleans, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, and Baton Rouge. Isn't it strange that Memphis is not mentioned. Houston, Dallas, and Atlanta are the three big Southern cities. They're kind of obvious choices for shared cultural identity, and perhaps family/personal connections.
This is a map based on the initial exodus and 40,000 internet "I'm safe in *****" posts.
I'm under the impression that Saint Louis University got a lot of Loyola students at the time out of Jesuit brotherhood.
How many permanent relocations did we get?
I-55 is a great conveyor of people from one place to another. The percent black map sure seems to make it seem like a natural corridor for cultural connections. Yet, there is that great gulf between Memphis and St. Louis. A black woman in Cape Girardeau was arrested and sentenced essentially for cutting in line at a grocery store and then disrespecting a police officer (who she said was seriously disrespecting her).
Yet, Girardeau is French. So is St. Gen. New Orleans was French, and so was St. Louis.
New Orleans is known for Mardi Gras. St. Louis claims to have the second best Mardi Gras. New Orleans was the jewel of the Louisiana Purchase. We were the capital of the Louisiana Territory. They have a Saint Louis Cathedral, and so do we. There used to be a cultural link.
Our demographics have shifted. St. Louis got a lot of Germans.
So what about our current demographic link?
It looks like African American out-migration from Missouri before 2000 did largely go down I-55 to Arkansas. Also telling is the Illinois population, which is high in Mississippi, Tennessee, and Arkansas. I-55 is a great conveyor of people, but they were largely south-bound in the late 90s.
Of the New Great Migration, Atlanta sure seems like a rising star. With a 2007 metro population of 5,376,285 that's 31.2 % black, which means 1,677,400 African-Americans in one place.
The metro population of New Orleans is only 1,167,294 by comparison.
As the New Orleans disapora settles, the Detroit disaspora is just underway. In 2000, Detroit was 81.6% black. Where do the people go? Chicago? Atlanta?
The main university in Jefferson City is Lincoln University, an historically black college. The closest university to downtown St. Louis is Harris-Stowe University, a desegregated black college merged with a white college. St. Louis, and Missouri, have the potential to play in this migratory game.
I'm very curious to explore the how, why, and to what effect.
The 2010 census will also redraw the electoral college. If the south has indeed gained population, their votes may weigh more heavily. If, as Paul Krugman's The Conscious of Liberal suggests, the Republican party has largely placed its political chips on southern racism, and the south gets more diverse, then future presidential elections are at stake. African-Americans vote 90% democrat. There's no need to worry about Michigan and Illinois, big cities vote democrat too.
Georgia gained almost 2,000,000 people between 2000 and 2010. The state is 30% black.
In the 2008 election it was 1,844,123 votes for Obama and 2,048,759 votes for McCain. A difference of 200,000 votes isn't so much. Indications are that Georgia should be a different state by 2012. With its increase in population, its electoral votes will probably jump up from 15 too.
This is what the Olympics can bring?
Posted by
Daron
2
comments
Tags:
Atlanta,
Black Urban Professionals,
Dallas,
Detroit,
Houston,
I-55,
Katrina,
Memphis,
New Orleans
Sunday, January 3, 2010
SIUE / UIC
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Students: 13,602
Acres: 2,660
Density: 5 students per acre!
University of Illinois - Chicago
Students: 21,914
Acres: 311
Density: 70 students per acre
In comparing UMSL to UMKC, we saw that the denser state school in Missouri is found in Kansas City. The lack of proper land use at UMSL created problems for walkability, drained economic resources, and made the campus mostly a parking destination instead of a living, thriving community.
Likewise for Illinois, we see that the public school in Greater St. Louis, SIUE, is again found out where land is cheaper. The landscaping is again mostly surface parking lots and expensively maintained fields. SIUE's size is inappropriately large. Even UI-Urbana-Champaign is smaller with 41,495 students on 1,468 acres. They maintain 28 students per acre, and they're out in the cornfields in rural Illinois.
SIUE in red on the map below stands out glaringly large.
If we look around at the layout we see that the walkable portions are surrounded on all sides by a sea of parking. The residential areas to the north are separated by driving distance and come with their own parking lots.
View Larger Map
In comparison, the bigger state school in Chicago, UIC, is located in the city on a considerably smaller campus.
UIC is cut off from the city by the two highways it borders, but is a much more walkable campus. UIC also has one of the best urban planning departments in the country.
View Larger Map
What we can take away from this is that St. Louis is at a disadvantage in terms of utilizing its two public universities as anchor for smart growth. Both UMSL and SIUE have significantly more land than they need and use their space in a wasteful manner not conducive to student life and activities.
As publically subsidized non-profits, it is in everyone's interest to reform these institutions to do more with less.
Students: 13,602
Acres: 2,660
Density: 5 students per acre!
University of Illinois - Chicago
Students: 21,914
Acres: 311
Density: 70 students per acre
In comparing UMSL to UMKC, we saw that the denser state school in Missouri is found in Kansas City. The lack of proper land use at UMSL created problems for walkability, drained economic resources, and made the campus mostly a parking destination instead of a living, thriving community.
Likewise for Illinois, we see that the public school in Greater St. Louis, SIUE, is again found out where land is cheaper. The landscaping is again mostly surface parking lots and expensively maintained fields. SIUE's size is inappropriately large. Even UI-Urbana-Champaign is smaller with 41,495 students on 1,468 acres. They maintain 28 students per acre, and they're out in the cornfields in rural Illinois.
SIUE in red on the map below stands out glaringly large.
If we look around at the layout we see that the walkable portions are surrounded on all sides by a sea of parking. The residential areas to the north are separated by driving distance and come with their own parking lots.
View Larger Map
In comparison, the bigger state school in Chicago, UIC, is located in the city on a considerably smaller campus.
UIC is cut off from the city by the two highways it borders, but is a much more walkable campus. UIC also has one of the best urban planning departments in the country.
View Larger Map
What we can take away from this is that St. Louis is at a disadvantage in terms of utilizing its two public universities as anchor for smart growth. Both UMSL and SIUE have significantly more land than they need and use their space in a wasteful manner not conducive to student life and activities.
As publically subsidized non-profits, it is in everyone's interest to reform these institutions to do more with less.
Posted by
Daron
2
comments
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

















