Ghost Stadium

I was surprised that the city council voted to postpone the demolition of the major part of World War Memorial Stadium. If you're not familiar with what happened at this week's council meeting, Ed Cone has a brief summary with links. If you want the long history, just click the tag for "World War Memorial Stadium" below and you can read all my posts over the past years.

The council is in a quandary about what to do, so while they're waiting for another engineering report, I thought I'd try to organize my scattered thoughts.

The Preservationist Perspective

A good place to start is with the Secretary of the Interior's Standard's for the Treatment of Historic Properties. They guide all federally-funded preservation projects, and they apply to WWMS because it's listed on the National Register of Historic Places, but they are enforceable only if federal money is involved in the renovation.

Here are the standards for preservation:

1. A property will be used as it was historically, or be given a new use that maximizes the retention of distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. Where a treatment and use have not been identified, a property will be protected and, if necessary, stabilized until additional work may be undertaken.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
3.  Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate, and conserve existing historic materials and features will be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon close inspection, and properly documented for future research.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
5.  Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
6. The existing condition of historic features will be evaluated to determine the appropriate level of intervention needed. Where the severity of deterioration requires repair or limited replacement of a distinctive feature, the new material will match the old in composition, design, color, and texture.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

The city-proposed plan, euphemistically called "renovation," weakly meets only the first of these criteria: the stadium will still be a war memorial, will still be used for amateur sports as it was intended, and the proposed plaza in front of its impressive triple-arched entry will give it a possible new use, since the area, if carefully and amply designed, may accommodate any number of public, civic, or patriotic activities. But it meets the standard only in an attenuated way, bringing in 30 spectators for college baseball games when once it attracted thousands.

The guidelines call for "identifying, retaining, and preserving character-defining features" of the building. The National Register nomination for the stadium identified not only as its entry arches, but also the inverted "J" shape of the seating, distinctive because it is unique to the stadium. The decorated exterior masonry walls flanking the pylons are also significant, as are the distinctive windows, which still exist but have been blocked up. (You can see them on this old postcard). Finally, the canopy over the seating, though not original, has gained its own significance over time, and certainly makes watching afternoon games more pleasant.

In short, the city's proposal is a preservationist's disaster. Less will be left of the 85-year old stadium than remains of the Roman Colosseum.

At the council meeting, Bill Burckley asserted that most, if not all the significant features can be preserved for the $1.4 million the city has to spend on it, and that is why the council voted to get a second opinion on the state of the stadium's concrete. It would be great if he's right, but I have no idea whether he is.

The Neighborhood Perspective

The Aycock Neighborhood has spent a decade advocating for the preservation of the stadium, and even commissioned its own renovation plans (with a lot of help from friends like Preservation Greensboro). Its concern has been not only with the structure and its use, but its neighborhood setting. Neighborhood representatives served for years on a city-appointed task force that came up with not one, but three different plans for a "park within a park" to include not only the stadium but also the nearby tennis courts, Greensboro Farmers' Market, and the old VFW building across the street. The idea was to increase the public use of the stadium area and to use the stadium for occasional musical entertainment.

Although none of these facilities is in the Aycock Neighborhood per se, they adjoin it, and are identified as vital elements of our neighborhood life in our city-council-adopted Strategic Plan and Summit Avenue Corridor plan. While the neighborhood has been self-funding and carrying out many of the elements of those plans on its own (including streetscape improvements and signage), the city has yet to follow through on any of the promised capital improvements.

My sense is that, while the neighborhood cares very much about the preservation of the stadium, it sees it as only one element of a neighborhood improvement plan, and not the most important one. The Strategic Plan, based on a very open and careful public process, identified the improvement of Summit Avenue as our number one priority. Number 5 on that list was "prepare a plan for War Memorial Stadium and Veterans' Plaza". Veterans' Plaza is the area of public use proposed for the zone between the stadium and the Farmers' Market, and the neighborhood's current interest as a neighborhood in the stadium is mainly in that public space now that minor league baseball is gone.

Make no mistake, though: the stadium was a huge neighborhood asset when neighbors could walk on summer evenings to see the Greensboro Bats play. The city council, the Guilford County commissioners, and various city boosters at that time promised the neighborhood that the old stadium would continue to be a well-maintained and well-used neighborhood asset.

The Parks and Recreation / Greensboro Sports Commission Perspective

The Greensboro Parks and Recreation Department, which operates the stadium, has consistently been adamant (since minor league baseball left) that it wants to use it for one purpose only: amateur baseball. The primary tenants of the stadium have been NCA&T University and Greensboro College, along with some youth leagues (the infield is too big for little league). But Greensboro College has since moved on to greener infields, and the number of youth league games has declined as interest in baseball has waned.

Parks and Rec representatives on the stadium task force opposed using the stadium for other entertainments, citing wear and tear on the playing surface. And any hopes that the old stadium might attract such acts were crushed by Greensboro Coliseum manager Matt Brown, who stole a march on the WWMS renovation proponents by building the White Oak Amphitheatre, much of which he completed even before the city council knew about it.

Members of the Greensboro Sports Commission have said that there is no chance of bringing regional or national tournaments to the stadium, at least as long as Greensboro's new downtown stadium is standing. The old stadium simply cannot provide the amenities that modern athletes and fans expect (although downtown stadium boosters claimed in 2003 that "War Memorial Stadium would be an ideal location to host regional, state, and national baseball tournaments.")

Parks and Recreation and the Greensboro Sports Commission representatives have maintained that there is no need for more than a few hundred seats at WWMS, and their statements have turned out to be true for the stadium's use over the last seven years.

The Political Perspective

The current city council is facing a dilemma left to it by previous councils when they decided to build the downtown stadium and later the White Oak Amphitheatre. Those two votes assured that there wasn't and isn't going to be enough baseball or outdoor musical entertainment to make full use of the old stadium. The newer facilities have sucked the life out of the old one, and there is nothing the present council can do about that.

Even if WWMS received a full-scale preservation and rehabilitation, with all its architectural features returned to their former glory, it would still be a melancholy place -- its empty seats a silent testament to its own diminishment, and to our diminished feelings for the soldiers who died in a war almost 100 years ago that few recall or understand.

So the council will have to decide how to allocate resources to a large and expensive structure for which there is now very little use -- unless they can think of some new use for it, and make sure that it gets used.

Farmers Appreciation Day at the Market (Video)

In spite of the drought, the produce is still plentiful at the Greensboro Farmers Curb Market on Yanceyville Street. Today's turnout for Farmers Appreciation Day was the biggest I've seen.

Let's Do It Again

Via Cone, a review of Greensboro's Southside neighborhood:

Before redevelopment in 1995, Southside produced $400,000 in tax revenues. Now that redevelopment is complete, the total tax revenue generated from the neighborhood is estimated at over $10 million.

Though the planning process was collaborative, the design itself had some initial detractors. During the course of design and implementation, when Tom Low and Bowman Development Group first proposed different approaches that went against convention, the project was greeted with skepticism and, according to DPZ director of town planning Tom Low, "in some cases laughed at, ignored, or considered counterproductive."

"We knew Southside was going to be a successful project," he continues, "and due to those who kept moving the implementation forward—the city staff, builders, and local officials—Southside has greatly exceeded its potential. Southside sold out in 2004. Now with a growing number of additional redevelopment initiatives expanding into adjacent neighborhoods and downtown housing and mixed-use projects underway, the design ideals pioneered in Southside can be heard and seen echoing across Greensboro."

The $5 million bond that was approved in 1990 for Southside turned out to be a great investment for the city. There are more neighborhoods in Greensboro ripe for this kind of redevelopment. Let's do it again.

Question for city council candidates at some future candidate forum: Will you support and promote more redevelopment projects like Southside?

Park As Metro Bling

WSJ (subscription required):

There's a new status symbol for American cities and it's not a soaring office tower or retro stadium. To many civic leaders, nothing says progressiveness and prosperity like an elaborate urban park.

On a scale not seen since the "City Beautiful" movement of the late 19th century, public green spaces are proliferating...

But even grass and trees can be complicated. Citizens and planners across the country are getting tied up in a larger debate about what a park should be -- one that often pits people who believe in peace and quiet and the soulful contemplation of nature against those who prefer zip lines, Frisbee golf and hang-gliding.

We've seen a little of that here in Greensboro, as not everybody finds our new Center City Park to their taste.

Maybe the park-as-status-symbol trend is what's behind city leaders' eagerness to acquire more park property just a few blocks from the new park.

But the NYT finds another common park problem:

“Parks in poorer neighborhoods are more likely to be in worse condition than parks in wealthier neighborhoods.”

I't's worth a vigorous public discussion here in Greensboro about whether public funds should be spent for another downtown park without a comprehensive look at the amenities and maintenance of parks all over the city.

As I've said before, I don't think the case for another "passive park" downtown is very strong.

Let's Not Put A Park There

The city of Greensboro is negotiating with Southern Railway to acquire or lease some prime property that borders the downtown business district and GSO's prize-winning neo-traditional neighborhood, Southside, and put a park on it.

At the moment, the property in question is a disused expanse of gravel, weeds, and railroad sidings. It certainly ought to be used for something, and in situations like this, people are apt to look at an empty lot and think "hey, that would be a great park!"

Because Parks are Good, right?

Well, no, not always. When it comes to thinking about parks, one ought to ask oneself, WWJJD? ("What Would Jane Jacobs Do?")

(Jacobs is the woman who, in the early 60's, had the courage to stand athwart city planning conventional wisdom shouting "Stop!" Nearly 50 years later, many of her ideas have been adopted by planners. It's fair to say that Southside -- a medium-density, mixed-use, urban neighborhood -- in some degree owes its existence to Ms. Jacobs.)

Here are some choice Jacobs-isms regarding parks (all emphasis added by me)

The main problem of neighborhood park planning boils down to the problem of nurturing diversified neighborhoods capable of using and supporting parks . . . . Neighborhood parks fail to substitute in any way for plentiful city diversity . . . . American cities today, under the illusions that open land is an automatic good and that quantity is equivalent to quality are ... frittering away money on parks, playgrounds and project land-oozes too large, too frequent, too perfunctory, too ill-located, and hence too dull or too inconvenient to be used. City parks are not abstractions, or automatic repositories of virtue or uplift . . . . They mean nothing divorced from their practical tangible uses . . . . The more successfully a city mingles everyday diversity of uses and users in its everyday streets, the more successfully, casually (and economically) its people thereby enliven and support well-located parks that can thus give back grace and delight to the neighborhoods instead of vacuity. (From The Death and Life of Great American Cities, chapter 5, "The Uses of Neighborhood Parks.")

It seems doubtful to me that the south end of downtown and the Southside neighborhood have enough population or diversity of activities to make a large park successful at that location, especially since there's a beautiful, brand-new downtown park only four blocks away.

Downtown Greensboro has plenty of park, but not enough people. Even during business hours (except at lunch) the sidewalks there do not really bustle, and in the mornings and evenings (except for night-life hours) it just doesn't have much real street life ... yet. And it never will if we keep using its small amount of available real estate for parks.

A park at that location will be a disincentive for Southside and other southern-downtown residents to make the 5-minute stroll to the Center City Park, and if those people aren't walking back and forth down Elm Street, they won't be stopping at any businesses for casual purchases.

A park at that location will suck users away from the Center City Park, probably causing both parks to be under-used.

A park at that location will be expensive to buy, build, and maintain, and the city is already contributing significantly to the maintenance of the Center City Park.

A general-use park at that location is as likely to be a magnet for crime as it is to enhance the neighborhood, and this could mar the success of the Southside neighborhood and of downtown development. Even if it just becomes a favored resting place for the harmless homeless (as seems likely to me), it will scare the suburbanites who visit the area and make the residents uncomfortable.

However, a mid-rise, mixed-use apartment/retail development at that spot would help to boost downtown Greensboro's currently meager population. It could easily pick up the architectural theme of Southside's 3-story live-work units (pictured here), with small retail or office units fronting the sidewalk, but with three or more stories of residential above.

Downtown Greensboro currently doesn't have much housing for middle-class people, and if the city bought this property, they could arrange to have it developed to fill this gap in the downtown housing market, as Raleigh has recently done.

So far I haven't heard anything about this proposal from any of GSO's planning or parks and recreation staff; it seems to be coming from the transportation department and the mayor. But shouldn't the Planning, Housing and Community Development, and Parks and Rec staff be driving this project?

Dear Office Depot ...

Update (1/28/08): Office Depot has now removed the sign after much lobbying by neighbors. Thanks, Office Depot.

I slammed Office Depot a while back about building a new store that shows its rear to Wendover Avenue.

It's finished now, and to give credit where credit is due, they spent a lot of money to landscape around it, planting a large number of Willow Oaks and doing a good job with the sidewalk -- or at least as good a job as can be done when the main entrance faces away from the street.

But they also placed an internally-lit pole sign right next to the historic Bessemer Avenue bridge, right on the very edge of the Fisher Park and Aycock historic districts.

The neighbors in both neighborhoods aren't happy, and have sent a registered letter to Office Depot's CEO Bruce Nelson, having gotten no response after three attempt to contact the national facilities manager.

Here's some video documentation, followed by the letter that was sent to CEO Nelson.

January 23, 2007

Bruce Nelson
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Office Depot Corporate
2200 Old Germantown Road
Delray Beach, FL
33445

Dear Mr. Nelson:

The neighbors and board members of the Fisher Park and Charles B. Aycock historic neighborhood associations welcome the new location of Office Depot at the corner of Wendover Avenue and Church Street in Greensboro, North Carolina.

We are, however, extremely concerned about the large commercial sign located at the corner of the entrances to both of the historic neighborhoods. The sign fronting Wendover Avenue is a wise choice as it is along a main corridor for travel and business.

The duplicate sign at the far end of the parking lot however interrupts the entrance into residential areas. Because of traffic patterns at this corner, it isn’t even necessary to have the second gigantic sign for Office Depot to be successful.

We would like to work with you to place a smaller, low-key sign consistent with the style of the Bessemer Avenue bridge and the historic nature of our neighborhoods. Both these neighborhoods have worked hard for many years to reclaim and restore the beautiful residences and historic character of these neighborhoods. Both have experienced resurgence in restoration and cmmitment from homeowners as well as support from the city of Greensboro.

We believe that taking this step will be consistent with the consideration you have already given to the parking lot landscaping and an opportunity to expand your environmental stewardship you are so proud of.

Your company policy indicates the following: “We are committed to the principles of good corporate citizenship, positive social impact and environmental sustainability.” We applaud your efforts involving environmental stewardship in the products you sell, but we encourage you to embrace broader concepts such as making relatively small acommodations to minimize disturbances to the environment in which you build.

When your national facilities manager was contacted three times by individuals during the construction stages of the store, there was no response. We hope that you will in fact, take a moment to contact us and work with us to assist the city and neighborhoods’ effort to revitalize and beautify at the same time as promote economic development.

We look forward to hearing from you and working with you to develop a sign that will enhance the area in which you have chosen to build.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Betsey Baun
President of the Charles B. Aycock Neighborhood Association
David Shub
President of the Fisher Park Neighborhood Association

Update: Greensboro's blogging billionaire Percy Walker thinks the letter should have been written differently.

Greensboro's Center City Park: Outstanding!

I wasn’t able to attend the ribbon cutting of the new Center City Park this morning, but Hero and I walked down to visit late this afternoon.

First impression: Wow.

Even though I’ve been passing by this park for more than a year as it was under construction, actually going into the finished product was – for me, at least – exhilarating.

Granted, I probably have more than the usual amount of enthusiasm for public spaces, but the other people there seemed to be impressed, too. And quite a few people were still walking through, sitting, and enjoying it, hours after the opening celebration. This park is going to be a huge success, and the people from Action Greensboro did one hell of a job.

But you don’t have to just take my word for it. The Project for Public Spaces has a set of 10 principles for good parks. Let’s go through them and see how the new park measures up.

1. Image and Identity. "Historically, squares were the center of communities, and they traditionally helped shape the identity of entire cities. Sometimes a fountain was used to give the square a strong image: Think of the majestic Trevi Fountain in Rome ..."

It remains to be seen whether this park will help shape the identity of Greensboro. But it's placed right smack in the heart of downtown, and it incorporates some features that are meant to highlight Greensboro's history, such as the shuttle-and-loom-like roof of this pergola, echoing Greensboro's textile-industry roots, and granite-inscribed quotes from Greensboro native son O. Henry.

Plus it has a really outstanding set of fountains, whose alternating sprays were delighting everybody, especially the kids.


(There was one minor glitch with the fountains, though. At one point in the display, some of the water arcs over a sidewalk from one pool to another. Very cool! -- and very wet if you happen to be on that sidewalk when it happens. The park designers were trying to figure out some way to warn people about that when I was there.)

2. Attractions and Destinations. "Any great square has a variety of smaller "places" within it to appeal to various people. These can include outdoor cafés, fountains, sculpture, or a bandshell for performances. ... some of the best civic squares have numerous small attractions such as a vendor cart or playground that, when put together, draw people throughout the day."

I didn't count them up, but the Center City Park has a bunch of attractions in addition to the fountains. There are small sculptures for kids to play on, a bandshell for performances, the Cafe Europa across the street, many small gardens, and large and small lawns for play or for events.

3. Amenities. "A square should feature amenities that make it comfortable for people to use. A bench or waste receptacle in just the right location can make a big difference in how people choose to use a place ... Public art can be a great magnet for children of all ages to come together. Whether temporary or permanent, a good amenity will help establish a convivial setting for social interaction."

The amenities in this park are excellent: ample benches and low granite walls (which kids love to walk on), public art by local artist Jim Cooper ("libation") and by Seagrove artist Fred D. Johnston ("Bird", "Pitcher", and "Chicks"), lots of little nooks for sitting, sidewalks paved with attractive masonry, and small gardens.

4. Flexible Design. "The use of a square changes during the course of the day, week, and year. To respond to these natural fluctuations, flexibility needs to be built in. Instead of a permanent stage, for example, a retractable or temporary stage could be used. Likewise, it is important to have on-site storage for movable chairs, tables, umbrellas, and games so they can be used at a moment's notice."

Although the park does have a permanent stage, it also has plenty of flex space as well as storage. Time will tell us how well these are used.

5. Seasonal Strategy. "A successful square can't flourish with just one design or management strategy. Great squares ... change with the seasons. Skating rinks, outdoor cafés, markets, horticulture displays, art and sculpture help adapt our use of the space from one season to the next."

Since the Center City Park has only been open for less than a day, we'll have to see how seasonal plans develop.

6. Access. "To be successful, a square needs to be easy to get to. The best squares are always easily accessible by foot: Surrounding streets are narrow; crosswalks are well marked; lights are timed for pedestrians, not vehicles; traffic moves slowly; and transit stops are located nearby. A square surrounded by lanes of fast-moving traffic will be cut off from pedestrians and deprived of its most essential element: people."

Access to the park is very good, and traffic is well-regulated for pedestrian use, with clearly-marked (and new) street-print crosswalks leading to the park, and an excellent new streetscape and sidewalk along Elm Street. Access is also good for suburbanites who want to come to the park for special events, since several (maybe too many) parking garages rim the park.

Action Greensboro made an effort to dress up one of the parking garages with a painting of Nathanael Greene, and the architects did a good job of distracting attention away from another of the garages with the placement of the fountains.

7. The Inner Square & the Outer Square. "Visionary park planner Frederick Law Olmsted's idea of the "inner park" and the "outer park" is just as relevant today as it was over 100 years ago. The streets and sidewalks around a square greatly affect its accessibility and use, as do the buildings that surround it. Imagine a square fronted on each side by 15-foot blank walls -- that is the worst-case scenario for the outer square. Then imagine that same square situated next to a public library: the library doors open right onto the square; people sit outside and read on the steps; maybe the children's reading room has an outdoor space right on the square, or even a bookstore and cafe. An active, welcoming outer square is essential to the well-being of the inner square."

The Center City Park is right across Davie Street from the Greensboro Cultural Arts Center, the Cafe Europa, and the YWCA. It is also right across Elm Street from the under-construction Center Pointe tower (the old Wachovia building), which we hope will have retail or restaurants on its ground floor.

In this case, the "inner park" has helped to create some of its own "outer park," since it is doubtful that developer Ray Carroll would have undertaken the Center Pointe project unless the Center City Park had already been underway.

8. Reaching Out Like An Octopus. "Just as important as the edge of a square is the way that streets, sidewalks and ground floors of adjacent buildings lead into it. Like the tentacles of an octopus extending into the surrounding neighborhood, the influence of a good square (such as Union Square in New York) starts at least a block away. Vehicles slow down, walking becomes more enjoyable, and pedestrian traffic increases. Elements within the square are visible from a distance, and the ground floor activity of buildings entices pedestrians to move toward the square."

The park designers did a good job on the footprint of the park, and the City of Greensboro has pitched in with some public sidewalk improvements. Making elements of the park visible from a block away is a tough one, though, since the park is surrounded on all sides by high-rises.

9. The Central Role of Management. "The best places are ones that people return to time and time again. The only way to achieve this is through a management plan that understands and promotes ways of keeping the square safe and lively. For example, a good manager understands existing and potential users and gears events to both types of people. Good managers become so familiar with the patterns of how people use the park that waste receptacles get emptied at just the right time and refreshment stands are open when people most want them. Good managers create a feeling of comfort and safety in a square, fixing and maintaining it so that people feel assured that someone is in charge."

Too early to make a judgement on this one: time will tell whether this park will be well-managed. However, former Action Greensboro Executive Director Susan Schwartz (pictured below) did a fine job of shepherding this complex project to completion. If past performance is an indicator of the future, things should go well.

10. Diverse Funding Sources. "A well-managed square is generally beyond the scope of the average city parks or public works department, which is why partnerships have been established to operate most of the best squares in the United States. These partnerships seek to supplement what the city can provide with funding from diverse sources, including--but not limited to--rent from cafés, markets or other small commercial uses on the site; taxes on adjacent properties; film shoots; and benefit fundraisers."

The park is privately owned and will be maintained in partnership with the city, and my understanding is that the owners plan to rent the park for various kinds of events in order to keep revenue flowing in.

In short, Action Greensboro seems to have done everything in its power to make this park a good public space. I guess that shouldn't be surprising; they brought in the Project for Public Spaces as consultants early in the process, and hired designers who knew what they were doing.

Well done! I'm very grateful, and Greensboro should be, too.