Benton Park Committee Updates
Concept designs
from the Charrette
The following VISION STATEMENT was agreed
upon.
To revitalize St.Louis City’s Benton Park as a
forward looking premier park by enhancing its historical features
and making it inviting to residents for daily use and attractive for
community events.
Documents:
The Master Plan -
This is the basis of all development for Benton Park.
Aerial Views of
the Benton Park
Current Design of
the Benton Park
Elevation Plans
of the Benton Park
Aerial Views of
the Comfort Station
Design Plans of
the Comfort Station
The new focus of
revitalizing the circle pound and comfort station has become the
created a new interest with the committee members, the BPNA
executive board, and the focus group.
We are now working in
concert to create an outline for the Rome Group to help create a new
grant application.
2nd Meeting
Decision and Ideas from Benton Park
Neighborhood Association Committee to Revitalize Benton Park
March 24th, 2007
The following VISION STATEMENT was agreed upon.
To revitalize St. Louis City’s Benton Park as a forward looking
premier park by enhancing its historical features and making it
inviting to residents for daily use and attractive for community
events.
Notes on discussion on the Vision Statement
To revitalize(1) St.Louis City’s(2) Benton Park as a forward
looking(3) premier park by enhancing its historical(4) features(5)
and making it inviting to residents for daily use(6) and attractive
for community events(7).
1.REVITALIZE - this verb was selected with the recognition that
improvements need to be made in many areas. Once completed the verb
would become “Preserve.” The group also recognized that in the 1993
plan the mission was to “market” the neighborhood using the park,
that is no longer a goal.
2.ST.LOUIS CITY - The park is one of over 100 owned and maintained
by the City. The message is that while the residents consider it a
premier park, so also does the City.
3.FORWARD LOOKING – The message is that the residents are open to
dialogue and ideas for continued improvements to our park. We don’t
want Benton Park to be typecast as an older park with a neighborhood
association and residents who are resistant to change.
4.HISTORIC - Benton Park has a rich history but the group realized
that words like Victorian, historic was open to many
interpretations. For example the community building is historic of
the 1960s. The consensus was that historic was needed to ensure
residents that the current features would be preserved.
5.FEATURES - Again the choice of words was to include the
recognition that the revitalization will focus first on those
features. The ongoing repair of the lagoons is such a demonstration.
6.DAILY USE – Results of the ongoing current resident survey and
previous focus group meetings have shown that safety, accessibility,
lighting, park cleanup, etc. need to be addressed to increase use
and participation.
7.COMMUNITY EVENTS – The park has a natural amphitheatre and large
enough Promenade for events for the nearby community. The limitation
of street parking will determine the type of events that can be
promoted.
USES OF THE PARK
The group agreed that future funders want to know that their monies
were beneficial in increasing the overall use of the Park. The
Neighborhood Associations need to focus on publicizing current
activities and promoting additional ones. We also understand that
until improvements are made other possibilities are not likely.
Annual Picnic
Meeting of the Association during summer months
Chalk Art Festival
Movie Nights
Concerts
Block Parties
Yard Sale
Tennis program
Art festival
“grand opening” of the repaired lagoon
Future uses could include
Weddings, receptions, and other gatherings where the community
building could be rented
Enhanced use of the park will happen as more people recognize that
issues of safety, cleanliness, lighting are addressed. Alderman
Ortmann put it as the “good guys” spend more time in the park the
“bad guys” will move elsewhere.
The revitalized beauty of the park that includes the lagoons, the
small pond, the renovated promenade, the playground, the walking
trails and an inviting community building will all bring people to
the park
FIRST PRIORITY FOR SEEKING FUNDING
The group agreed that our first priority was to focus on the
community building, the round pond and the promenade (as defined in
the 1993 plan), particularly the area west of the community
building.
Alderman Ortmann informed the attendees that the funds required to
fix the lagoons has depleted his funds and repairing the small pond
was not within available city resources.
Our working assumption during the planning meeting was that the
staff of the Parks Department and other departments will provide
cost estimates which will be acceptable for future proposals.
The group realizes the dilemma of making the community building
user friendly for group activities versus losing its assets by
removing it and having no acceptable alternative. The group decision
was to go forward with improving the building. Ideas and initial
concepts were discussed with the desire to talk with the City Parks
director on what was possible and not possible.
1.The community building needs to be made friendly and accessible.
 |
Structural repairs as needed
including roof |
|
Improved electricity, sinks and
counter spaces to allow folks to hold events. |
|
Ensuring the restrooms are ADA
approved, (if the Park Department’s decision is to keep them
rather than going to portable potties) |
|
Masonry repaired.
|
|
Alternative walls/railings
overlooking the pond to increase visibility and safety
|
|
Removal and if necessary artistic
replacement of the protective screens |
|
(Determination from the parks
director if it would be possible to remove the restrooms and
have portable potties brought in for community events thus
allowing a more open community building architecture)
|
|
Announcements/votes at Neighborhood Association
general meeting (vote for updating small pond & comfort station,
Dec. ’05) |
|
Information in minutes/newsletters |
|
Interested member group (approximately 42 people
indicated interest in parks) |
|
Two focus groups (approximately 12 people
attending) |
|
Listserv (200+ email addresses) |
|
Online survey (75 responses to date) |
|
Written survey to all 1,700 households (end of
April) |
|
Informal input through Parks Committee |
|
Individual initiative (ongoing vision and
persistence of Parks Committee) |
|
Alderman input/assistance |
