Thought I would share some pictures of the construction that has started on our new dog park.
These are plumbers that are working on building a new fountain for the dog area that will be under construction soon. Also, the sprinkler heads will be replaced with metal ones to prevent the homeless from breaking them when they go off. *shrug*
Why did they chop down the tall pine (?) trees on the edge of Lucas Park? What kind of "improvement" is that? Why does city always frigging chop down the trees as its first sign of "action" on anything?
Luftmensch wrote:Why did they chop down the tall pine (?) trees on the edge of Lucas Park? What kind of "improvement" is that? Why does city always frigging chop down the trees as its first sign of "action" on anything?
Hopefully they're replacing them with something else. Pine trees are actually pretty bad choices for the area; they tend to draw a lot more water and nutrients from the soil when compared to other trees. And their root systems make it hard for grass to grow around them. Basically, they don't play well with others.
The trees were removed to widen the sidewalk on 14th to make it both ADA accessible and more walkable.
The inappropriately sized trees also provided "cover" for drug dealing, public sex in the park, and other nuisance behavior that we need to get rid of.
Actually, if you want to go back to the history of the park, there weren't ANY trees there originally.
Inno, unfortunately we don't have a defined "schedule" for when work will be completed other than "soon". (yes I know...).
However, I believe that the scope of work includes the dog run on the north side, new drinking fountain, widened sidewalks and a retaining wall built to hold the dirt back on the western edge.
We had hoped to repair the existing decorative fountain on the eastern side, however, the cost to repair it would be astronomical (digging up the cement, replacing, etc.).
I walk by Lucas park on the way to and from work on Wash Ave and have never had a problem (I'm a girl and don't pack heat either).
As for the posting about the park not having trees in the past, why would anyone ever want to hang out in a park in St. Louis that had no trees? In summertime it's unbearable. And cutting down trees isn't going to fix the social problems in that park. The logic just doesn't work. Now the park is less appealing for everyone, not just the vagrants and criminals. How is that better? How long before the new trees can grow to come even close to what was there? Other towns have ordinances against cutting trees down--seems like we're all too eager to do so.
A long-term solution will require more "eyes on the park". The depressed grade of the park along with the fact that it's the back door for every building that faces are pretty huge obstacles to overcome. Maybe having the front door of the library on Locust will help. Moving the dog park, I'm not so sure.
As mentioned before, the trees were planted to hide the vacant warehouses on Washington. We don't need them anymore, and I think the park would be more inviting without them. Trees do provide cover for illegal activity, which is why all the trees on my street were removed a few years ago and replaced with smaller ones. It just looks more clean. Lucas Park was built with clean symmetrical lines, and it would be great to see it return to that state.
Unfortunately the clean lines will be spoiled by the dog park, wish they could have found another location for that. It would have been great to see a historical restoration much like what was accomplished at the Grand Basin in Forest Park. I'm not against a dog park just one in this location.
urbz wrote:As mentioned before, the trees were planted to hide the vacant warehouses on Washington. We don't need them anymore, and I think the park would be more inviting without them. Trees do provide cover for illegal activity, which is why all the trees on my street were removed a few years ago and replaced with smaller ones. It just looks more clean. Lucas Park was built with clean symmetrical lines, and it would be great to see it return to that state.
No offense, but I think this is horribly misguided.
One of the easiest ways to note a depressed neighborhood is an immature or missing tree canopy.
Large trees reduce energy costs as they block heat absorption into the roofs of homes. They filter air pollution. They make the sidewalk less hot in the summer months. They help filter urban runoff and water pollution. They make a block more attractive and inviting (if the height of the tree is appropriate for the block). They raise property values.
The North Side has cut many trees down due to concerns that trees shield crimes, yet it's an endless cycle. The block becomes less friendly to those buying a home (and to pedestrians).
In addition, small trees are more susceptible to destruction by vandals as well as the elements. Many don't survive into maturity because they're planted too young. They also take decades to achieve the benefits I've outlined above.
I think the loss of the trees in Lucas Park was unfortunate, but it's even more disheartening to think a beautiful, historic residential neighborhood would rid of its trees for short-sighted reasons.
gopher wrote:
Actually, if you want to go back to the history of the park, there weren't ANY trees there originally.
Well of course not. It was a brand new park.
Lucas Garden was constructed in 1914 (the same year as the photo you posted). I've got a photo from the 1920's (pg. 86, Downtown St. Louis, Images of America Series) which clearly shows the park ringed with trees, which look to be about 10 - 15 feet tall.
The point is, it takes decades for trees to mature. Now we're right back to square one. Very disappointing.
Framer wrote:
The point is, it takes decades for trees to mature. Now we're right back to square one. Very disappointing.
I think you guys/gals are missing the point. We are not ripping up a building, we are ripping up a tree. We can replant them where they are a better fit.. maybe duplicate the "1920's" that Framer liked.
Of course in the SHORT TERM it is sad, but once again, no one cares about the long term. At least one group is.
Matt, you are absolutely correct about the benefits of having mature trees lining our residential streets. Most of our great neighborhoods have beautiful foliage and it is very inviting. But I still don't see why Lucas Park needed those trees. Most passers by did not realize what a great space it is because it was usually a shady place, in every sense of the word. Just the fact that something is being done with the space will change more perceptions than what is actually being done (among tourists/visitors of course. What is being done definitely matters to the residents).
Yes but most of our neighborhoods do not have Larry Rice as a neighbor. After reading some of the complaints coming from residents merely walking past the park, I think a short-term remedy like this may have been needed. I'm sure some trees will be replaced if enough people voice their opinions. I'm sure the residents of the loft district appreciate having a place that they can now use, and now have a reason to use with the dog park.
As I stated in the other "Homeless / Panhandlers" thread...
The trees in question had to be removed because:
1) They were diseased and a dangerous.
2) The sidewalk on 14th must be made ADA compliant.
And I'll say this again... This is what happens when we have neglect and abuse of a park for nearly 40 years. That's what should be sad. That's what you should be angry about. That's what you should be fighting for in your own neighborhood... To prevent what has happened here from happening elsewhere. That's what you should be working to improve.
Having a bunch of bums camping out, urinating, and defecating everywhere in the park, IN PUBLIC, does more to showcase a "distressed" neighborhood than a temporary lack of trees.
Creating an environment where this is tolerated is unacceptable and downright negligent.
We WANT and NEED YOUR HELP to create and more importantly MAINTAIN a vibrant, revitalized environment and a good neighborhood.
Things worth having have to be fought for, worked at, and watched over like a freakin' hawk if they are to be nurtured and survive. Period.
This is OUR neighborhood. This is not a waystation for transients. You want a decent place to live? Then fight for it. Clean it, drive out the drug dealers, and don't put up with unacceptable crap in your neighborhood.
YOU are the neighbors. YOU are the ones who can have the greatest impact. I'm not trying to blow smoke up your ass, it's the damn truth. You want CHANGE? You want revitalization? Then WORK at it.
No one ever said it was going to be easy, and there will be turbulent changes. But change we must if we are to make this city great again.
And it can start in a small little park that everyone has given up on.
