For those with a negative disposition to the winning team

geoffksu · PostSep 22, 2010#12010-09-22T14:55+00:00

This is for everyone who has a negative deposition towards the winning team and specifically those not involved in the design/construction profession:

There is a LARGE difference between creating 'pretty' renderings and actually having a design implemented and constructed. Just because you can draw it up in PhotoShop, etc. doesn't mean that it translates well to implementation. There are countless number of aspects of design implementation that have to be taken into account (and which everyone will learn over the coming months): a BUDGET (this project has to be funded-it isn't going to fall out of the sky), design/engineering approvals, regulatory approvals, permit approvals, zoning approvals, Corp of Engineers approval, R.O.W. and other property acquisition, etc.

The DESIGN COMPETITION is over and the most qualified team (based on programming, inventory, analysis, design feasibility, and previous experience) has been chosen. All of the other teams may have had pretty renderings and unique ideas that we all dream of but would never come to fruition due to not being feasible. Everyone needs to look past the other submissions and their ideas and concentrate on exploring why MVVA's submission won (and should go research other MVVA projects and their success).

Oh, and everyone that still has a problem with the winning Team - you should have voiced your concern when you had the chance.

(No harsh feelings intended)

midcoaststl · PostSep 22, 2010#22010-09-22T15:57+00:00

After going over the plan, I really like it and I think it will be a vast improvement...

urbz · PostSep 23, 2010#32010-09-23T02:29+00:00

As long as the underpass park is completed, I'll be happy. That small area is one of my favorite places in the city. This plan will go a long way to clean up the edges around the arch grounds. Now it is up to us to push for further development around the grounds. This is just the beginning.

jcity · PostSep 23, 2010#42010-09-23T02:42+00:00

WOW. How depressing is this selection? what was even the point of the competition? they could have hired Joe Blow MissouRAH to come up with this plan. This looks like something that Cape Girardeau would do. just when I thought St. Louis was thinking BIG again. something to match the internationally recognized gateway arch, we come up with something that will attract ZERO additional people. and the "farmers market" on the waterfront. sounds like a lame attempt at being modern and fresh..wow..

I can understand that over photoshopped images are often pie in the sky, but this plan is just pathetic. it's like save the money, and don't even bother. who in the HELL would go to a farmers market along the riverfront?! The one on Post-Office Plaza is barely surviving.. adjacent to ALL of the downtown residents. and the cutesy "natural water waterways" look around the ponds, which clearly fly in the face of the original arch grounds 1960's design. Removing the garage, where TONS of downtown workers park, is ridiculous too.

All in all, this brings NO MORE PEOPLE downtown... truly a missed opportunity. here's to keeping it as is until funds are available to do something good. CLEARLY there's no way we could build the Arch today...

zun1026 · PostSep 26, 2010#52010-09-26T07:29+00:00

geoffksu wrote:This is for everyone who has a negative deposition towards the winning team and specifically those not involved in the design/construction profession:

There is a LARGE difference between creating 'pretty' renderings and actually having a design implemented and constructed. Just because you can draw it up in PhotoShop, etc. doesn't mean that it translates well to implementation. There are countless number of aspects of design implementation that have to be taken into account (and which everyone will learn over the coming months): a BUDGET (this project has to be funded-it isn't going to fall out of the sky), design/engineering approvals, regulatory approvals, permit approvals, zoning approvals, Corp of Engineers approval, R.O.W. and other property acquisition, etc.

The DESIGN COMPETITION is over and the most qualified team (based on programming, inventory, analysis, design feasibility, and previous experience) has been chosen. All of the other teams may have had pretty renderings and unique ideas that we all dream of but would never come to fruition due to not being feasible. Everyone needs to look past the other submissions and their ideas and concentrate on exploring why MVVA's submission won (and should go research other MVVA projects and their success).

Oh, and everyone that still has a problem with the winning Team - you should have voiced your concern when you had the chance.

(No harsh feelings intended)

First off all of these teams had very qualified professionals, so I find it hard to believe that there was more to there submissions besides pretty renderings (which I know to be true because I read them all).

Second the most qualified team won according to that jury. Stating it as fact is merely an opinion.

Third MVV had no clue when it came to phasing and sounded like an idiot when it came to many of the questions. I am not implying that he is an idiot, because I don't believe that to be true. BUT he did very poorly in the jury presentation.He constantly sidestepped questions.

Finally, I still don't see how this makes connections with the city that much better and draw people between the two. Not to mention removing Washington Avenue seems like a poor move. If connecting the Landing and The Arch grounds is so important then how is having a bridge between the two any less of a barrier? Even if this is the right team to win, they have a lot to think and re-think.

Alex Ihnen · PostSep 26, 2010#62010-09-26T13:09+00:00

I sat through the jury presentations and have spoken to Micheal Van Valkenburgh and think it's just ridiculous to say that he (and/or his team) had no clue when it comes to phasing, or that he constantly sidestepped questions. If one is aware whatsoever of his past work, or that of designers on his team, it would be easy to see that despite the challenges involved in the Arch grounds re-design, the team that's done 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the Brooklyn Bridge Park and much more know well how to phase (and complete) the Arch grounds design.

zun1026 · PostSep 26, 2010#72010-09-26T17:13+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:I sat through the jury presentations and have spoken to Micheal Van Valkenburgh and think it's just ridiculous to say that he (and/or his team) had no clue when it comes to phasing, or that he constantly sidestepped questions. If one is aware whatsoever of his past work, or that of designers on his team, it would be easy to see that despite the challenges involved in the Arch grounds re-design, the team that's done 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the Brooklyn Bridge Park and much more know well how to phase (and complete) the Arch grounds design.

Hey I am actually a fan of some of their work, so its not like it think they are ill-equipped to do the job. However, in my opinion, their Q&A was pretty poor. To each their own though.

P.S. I am glad they are looking into the combined storm sewer issue and bioremediation.

phoaddict · PostSep 28, 2010#82010-09-28T00:59+00:00

Back in town for a week from living abroad and I learn about this competition with excitement. I research all the designs with so much enthusiasm. "Wow this is amazing. What an opportunity. Go st. louis! I can't believe we pulled off this competition!!!" I see one group that I think really aims low and dismiss miss them completely. I see the other ideas and think there's nothing that can go wrong with these ideas! I'm enthralled. Wow! I imagine where I could bring relatives and friends I've met along the way in our city. This great possibility...Bring it on!

I eagerly await the results, excited to further solidify my visions of the possibilities of the arch grounds. I go to urbanstl to find out the...mvva...wait which is mvva...let me check...

WHAT THE F**K!? How the f*** did this team win. Is this a joke...no...wait..Was this the team I was sure wouldn't win? It was! How did they...Then slowly reality sinks back into my mind that I'm back home. And I remember that things don't really change in St. Louis. "Oh yeah" I remember, shaking my head. I'm in st. louis now. I can voice how much I think this was the wrong choice and how pathetic the city is and the decision makers. The lack of vision. The lack of backbone. How we're screwed as a country and city for the oncoming century...but that would be just too much. I realize...it's not worth it. Whatever they make, it will at least be nice...

I hope the best for mvva, and hope they read comments on this forum and other places online to realize they need to spice it up a bit. I am upset though that SOM or Weiss didn't win. I don't view this competition as the end all say all project for st. louis, but I think it does speak a lot about the next century of our nation and city. It seems that great vision simply doesn't win here anymore.

Alex Ihnen · PostSep 28, 2010#92010-09-28T01:30+00:00

Respectfully, I think you were hoping for something more than this competition was about. It's easy to want the most transformational design, but when dealing with a National Park Service memorial and everything else (timeline, possible budget, etc.), there were severe limits on the teams. You may not like that, but don't blame MVVA, they are indisputably one of the top landscape design firms in the world and have created a design here that will transform the Arch grounds as much as possible given the constraints. If you want to complain, complain about the National Park Service, who practically dictated that the underground museum couldn't have skylights, that the entrance couldn't be exciting, etc. Again, though, it's not just NPS. You can blame the Army Corps of Engineers for not allowing dramatic lighting of the Eads, blame Illinois for allowing the east bank to become so polluted that doing anything over there is incredibly difficult...the list goes on and on.

zun1026 · PostSep 28, 2010#102010-09-28T03:48+00:00

I do have to say MVV does have a great ability to reconstruct the natural landscape in a very natural way. The restoration of the lakes is there best selling point IMO.

innov8ion · PostSep 28, 2010#112010-09-28T22:17+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:Respectfully, I think you were hoping for something more than this competition was about. It's easy to want the most transformational design, but when dealing with a National Park Service memorial and everything else (timeline, possible budget, etc.), there were severe limits on the teams.

Well how long did it take to implement Millenium Park from conception to birth? It turned out pretty spectacularly and it didn't take longer than five years to implement did it?

Edit: Apparently it had a planned three year window from conception to birth however it was delayed four years.

Wikipedia wrote:"Planning of the park began in October 1997. Construction began in October 1998, and Millennium Park was opened in a ceremony on July 16, 2004, four years behind schedule."

Alex Ihnen · PostSep 28, 2010#122010-09-28T23:26+00:00

Millennium Park was a huge transformational project. However, it isn't a National Park Service memorial, the US Army Corps of Engineers and Coast Guard were not involved and there were no Interstate highways adjacent to the park. Railroads? Sure, plenty of them - they just paid to cover them - and plenty of city politics as well. But again, Millennium Park produced something close to what was asked for. Here, the competition was asking for something different than what many people hoped to see.

lukethedrifter · PostSep 29, 2010#132010-09-29T01:12+00:00

It hurts my eyes to see deposition in the thread title.

bonwich · PostSep 29, 2010#142010-09-29T01:56+00:00

lukethedrifter wrote:It hurts my eyes to see deposition in the thread title.

What would we do without MVVA?

(There. Now we have a negative preposition to MVVA. Feel better?

)

RobbyD · PostOct 17, 2010#152010-10-17T16:46+00:00

Don't want to beat a dead horse...tho I wonder if PETA could really do anything given the horse is dead...but

I can't wait to review these threads in five years when (most likely) the new Arch grounds are unveiled...I have a feeling the ground swell of goodwill from all Americans (remember this is not a city/state park, ITS A NATIONAL MEMORIAL) will be palpable and all the negative nancys (though I do understand their complaints) will be eating it...

If we give the 4 million plus visitors a year to the JNEM good reasons and the gosh darn ability to venture off the grounds and explore what beautiful architecture is left and enjoy the other amenities of the city, watch out...

Alex Ihnen · PostOct 17, 2010#162010-10-17T19:24+00:00

I believe that attendance had dipped to ~2M. This is why the NPS is excited to see changes. I really think that most people, here in St. Louis and elsewhere, won't read or hear anything about the changes. And whether it's the best design or not, the visual changes won't be spectacular. Therefore, I don't think people will be really excited, but we'll see. I think the beer garden has a chance to be a real STL destination.

timeforguinness · PostOct 18, 2010#172010-10-18T15:09+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:I believe that attendance had dipped to ~2M. This is why the NPS is excited to see changes. I really think that most people, here in St. Louis and elsewhere, won't read or hear anything about the changes. And whether it's the best design or not, the visual changes won't be spectacular. Therefore, I don't think people will be really excited, but we'll see. I think the beer garden has a chance to be a real STL destination.

Do you think the NPS would allow a beer garden?

Alex Ihnen · PostOct 18, 2010#182010-10-18T16:32+00:00

Sure. You can buy beer in a number of National Parks. Of course it's possible that they won't - we'll know soon.