Dalton Webb Fall 2017 Thesis

COMMUNITY GROWTH CENTER THESIS:
THE STUDY OF THE FAIRGROUND PARK AREA & ITS POSSIBLE NEW FUTURE
by
Dalton Webb
B.S. Interdisciplinary: Interior Design and Construction Management, Southeast

Missouri State University, 2014
M.Arch., Southern Illinois University, 2017
A Thesis
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Masters of Architecture.
School of Architecture
in the Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
December 2017
THESIS APPROVAL
COMMUNITY GROWTH CENTER THESIS:

THE STUDY OF THE FAIRGROUND PARK AREA & ITS POSSIBLE NEW FUTURE
By
Dalton Lee Webb
A Thesis Submitted in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Masters
in the field of Architecture
Approved by:
Shannon McDonald, Chair
Jessica Augusta Crowe
Leslie A Duram
Rolando Gonzalez Torres
Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
12/1/17
AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF
Dalton Lee Webb, for the Masters of Architecture degree in Architecture, presented
on 11/13/17, at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
TITLE: COMMUNITY GROWTH CENTER THESIS: THE STUDY OF THE

FAIRGROUND PARK AREA & ITS POSSIBLE NEW FUTURE
MAJOR PROFESSOR: Ms. Shannon McDonald
Low income areas in the United States and the world have one thing in
common. They are areas in disrepair. The Fairground Park area in the north side of
St. Louis, Missouri is such an area. In this thesis, the issues surrounding this area
was investigated and a solution developed from them. Some of the issues are low
access to fresh food, few employment opportunities, lack of safe public places, and
a few others. From these issues 7 building areas were decided on to address the
issues of the area. These 7 solutions were combined into one building and is called
the Community Growth Center, CGC. These building areas could be built as
separate buildings but their collaboration together helps create a neighborhood like
feeling. The CGC is something that would give a place of learning, safety, and
growth in an area that is in disrepair. This is done by designing a place that the
community a place to be proud of and use far into the future.
i
DEDICATION
This thesis is dedicated to my late mother and father. They passed away in
2001 and 2011. Even though they have been gone for long time now what they
taught me is still with me today. They taught me to use my abilities and position in
life to help others when I can. This thesis and its purpose is to help others with my
abilities and position in life right now. I love and miss you two dearly.
I also dedicate this thesis to John Pruitt, my previous professor at Southeast
Missouri State University in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. I would not be in architecture
school if it was not for him. Our conversation led to me deciding to pursue a Masters
of Architecture and now I am here finishing it up. Thank you John for everything.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would first like to thank my thesis chair Associate Professor Shannon
McDonald at Southern Illinois University Carbondale. She was always available to
assist me with issues that I encountered. She gave me invaluable advice for keeping
me on track with my thesis. She allowed me to make this thesis my own but steered
me in the right direction whenever she though that I need it. I appreciate all of the
help you have given me through this process.
To my thesis committee: Dr. Jessica Crowe, Dr. Leslie Duram, and Dr.
Rolando Gonzalez-Torres. I want to thank all of you for your advice, comments, and
time that has helped me develop my thesis into what it is today. Your expertise
helped me see things that I would normally not see.
To the Neighborhood Development Executive, Dotti McDowell of St. Louis
City. I would like to thank you for helping me see this project differently. The
information and resources that you made me away of has helped me uncover things
that I was unaware of.
I want to thank my friends for putting up with me during this long process of
writing my thesis and my hectic schedule that came along with it. It has been a long
journey to get here.
Finally I want to thank everyone else that helped me with research, site
exploration, site documentation, and brainstorming.
iii
PREFACE
The basis for this project stemmed from my want to help others reach their full
potential. I believe that everyone has the potential to live fruitful and meaningful
lives. In areas of poverty this is something that seems out of reach to people living
there. They feel abandoned by society which is due to the lack of investment into
these neighborhoods. As a neighborhood declines over time the residents
experience expanding struggles. This leads to a vicious cycle that never ends. The
youth raised in these areas only know what they are raised in. They will only know
the crime, poverty, and crumbling neighborhood around them. This is detrimental to
their future. They go to school being taught that they can do whatever they want to
be. Yet their reality is not telling them that.
The above issue is something that is very important to me because the youth
is our future. It is the responsibility of the current generations in power to use our
abilities to create a better future for future generations. I feel that architecture,
nature, and public involvement is key to solving these issues. We are responsible for
the things that get built and we should push to make the built environment help build
create a better future for everything that lives on this planet. I hope that this thesis is
a reflection of doing just that.
iv
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
PAGE
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. i
DEDICATION .............................................................................................................. ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................ iii
PREFACE .................................................................................................................. iv
LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF IMAGES ...................................................................................................... x
CHAPTERS
CHAPTER 1 – Introduction ............................................................................. 1
CHAPTER 2 – Method and Reasoning of Choice ........................................... 3
CHAPTER 3 – Research: Concise History of St. Louis ................................... 5
CHAPTER 4 – Research: Fairground Park History ....................................... 10
CHAPTER 5 – Research: Current Demographics ......................................... 26
CHAPTER 6 – Research: North Side St. Louis Analysis ............................... 46
CHAPTER 7 – Community Centers: Case and Precedent Studies ............... 55
CHAPTER 8 – Center Name, Ideology, and Image ...................................... 62
CHAPTER 9 – Overall Building Program ...................................................... 67
CHAPTER 10 – Building Area: Commons Area ............................................ 76
CHAPTER 11 – Building Area: Teaching Kitchen ......................................... 81
CHAPTER 12 – Building Area: Urban Agriculture Center ............................. 86
vi
CHAPTER 13 – Building Area: Makerspace ............................................... 101
CHAPTER 14 – Building Area: Recreation and Aquatics Center ................ 108
CHAPTER 15 – Building Area: Daycare ..................................................... 112
CHAPTER 16 – Building Area: Administration ............................................ 116
CHAPTER 17 – Building Design ................................................................. 119
CHAPTER 18 – Project Site Analysis and Considerations .......................... 127
CHAPTER 19 – Project Systems and Sustainability Features .................... 147
CHAPTER 20 – Building Operations ........................................................... 164
CHAPTER 21 – Funding Possibilities ......................................................... 168
CHAPTER 22 – Fairground Park Redesign ................................................ 171
CHAPTER 23 – Summary, Conclusion, Recommendation ......................... 177
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 179
IMAGE REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 184
APPENDICES
Appendix A – 1915 Housing Ordinance ...................................................... 189
Appendix B – 1939 uniform Restriction Agreement ..................................... 190
Appendix C – Larry Isom’s Reply to Questionnaire ..................................... 194
Appendix D –North St. Louis Questionnaire ................................................ 196
Appendix E –Thesis Presentation Boards ................................................... 197
VITA .................................................................................................................... 204
vii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
Table 1: 2010 Census Data - Missouri ..................................................................... 29
Table 2: 2010 Census Data - St. Louis City ............................................................. 31
Table 3: 2010 Census Data - North St. Louis City ................................................... 33
Table 4: 2010 Census Data - Fairground Park Area ................................................ 35
Table 5: 2010 Census Data – Population Comparison ............................................ 36
Table 6: 2015 American Community Survey – Median Income Comparison ........... 37
Table 7: 2015 A.C.S. - Household Type Comparison .............................................. 38
Table 8: 2015 A.C.S. – Education Levels Comparison ............................................ 39
Table 9: 2015 A.C.S. – Employment Status Comparison ........................................ 40
Table 10: 2015 A.C.S. – Commuting by Mode Comparison .................................... 40
Table 11: 2015 A.C.S. – Poverty Rates Comparison ............................................... 41
Table 12: 2015 A.C.S. – Age Distribution Comparison ............................................ 42
Table 13: 2015 A.C.S. – Types of Housing Units Comparison ................................ 42
Table 14: 2015 A.C.S. – Housing Occupancy Comparison ..................................... 43
Table 15: 2015 A.C.S. – Occupancy w/ Housing Cost Burden Comparison ............ 44
Table 16: Areas and Their Purpose ......................................................................... 68
Table 17: Schedule of the Administration Area ........................................................ 69
Table 18: Schedule of the Daycare Area ................................................................. 69
Table 19: Schedule of the Makerspace Area ........................................................... 70
Table 20: Schedule of the Commons Area .............................................................. 71
Table 21: Schedule of the Recreation Area ............................................................. 72

viii
Table 22: Schedule of the Aquatic Area................................................................... 72
Table 23: Schedule of the Teaching Kitchen Area ................................................... 73
Table 24: Schedule of the Urban Agriculture Center................................................ 74
Table 25: Combined Square Footage of all Areas ................................................... 74
Table 26: Area Schedule (Gross Building) ............................................................... 75
Table 27: Livestock Spacing Requirements ........................................................... 100
Table 28: Livestock Needs ..................................................................................... 101
Table 29: v4 Indoor Water Use Reduction Calculator Summary for D+C .............. 149
Table 30: Condensed Version of Fixtures Comparison for Indoor Water Use ....... 149
Table 31: National Stormwater Calculator Report: Summary Results.................... 150
Table 32: Stormwater Calculator Report ................................................................ 150
Table 33: Area Staffing .......................................................................................... 169
Table 34: Fairground Park Redesign Facilities Count ............................................ 178
ix
LIST OF IMAGES
IMAGE PAGE
Image 1: Fairground Park in 1875............................................................................ 11
Image 2: Bear Pit in 1876 ........................................................................................ 12
Image 3: Bear Pit in 2017 ........................................................................................ 12
Image 4: Entrance to Fairgrounds Park circ. 1880-1890.......................................... 13
Image 5: Bear pit circ. 1890 ..................................................................................... 14
Image 6: Gazebo in Fairground Park circ. 1894 ...................................................... 14
Image 7: Whippleborn Fire Insurance Maps circ. 1895 ............................................ 16
Image 8: Aerial of Fairground Park circ. 1926 - 1936............................................... 17
Image 9: The Rotarian magazine Article circ. 1914 ................................................. 18
Image 10: Swimmers at Fairground Park Pool circ. 1920s ...................................... 19
Image 11: Children at the Fairground Swimming Pool circ. 1949 ............................ 20
Image 12: Cops Guarding Man Covered in Blood from the beating by the mob circ.
1949 ......................................................................................................................... 21
Image 13: State of Missouri ..................................................................................... 27
Image 14: St. Louis City with north side of St. Louis City Highlighted ...................... 27
Image 15: Fairground Park Area .............................................................................. 27
Image 16: St. Louis City Owned Property ................................................................ 47
Image 17: Age 14 to 24 Arrest Rate (2014) ............................................................. 48
Image 18: Low Income and Low Grocery Store Access .......................................... 49
Image 19: Low Income and Low Grocery Store Access Proximity to Site ................ 50
Image 20: Community Gardens Proximity to Site .................................................... 51

x
Image 21: Community Outreach Proximity to Site ................................................... 52
Image 22: Children Swimming at Fairground Pool ................................................... 56
Image 23: CGC Logo ............................................................................................... 66
Image 24: Commons West View Rendering ............................................................ 76
Image 25: Commons 1st Floor Area.......................................................................... 79
Image 26: Commons 2nd Floor Area ......................................................................... 79
Image 27: Commons 2nd Floor Conference Rooms .................................................. 80
Image 28: Kitchen Floor Plan ................................................................................... 84
Image 29: Kitchen Layout ........................................................................................ 85
Image 30: Ideal Empty Lot Farm .............................................................................. 89
Image 31: UAC Hall Rendering ................................................................................ 92
Image 32: First Floor – Urban Agriculture Center .................................................... 93
Image 33: Second Floor – Urban Agriculture Center ............................................... 95
Image 34: Third Floor – Urban Agriculture Center ................................................... 96
Image 35: Rooftop Greenhouse – Urban Agriculture Center ................................... 97
Image 36: First Floor Harvest Outbuilding – Urban Agriculture Center .................... 98
Image 37: Livestock Buildings – Urban Agriculture Center ...................................... 99
Image 38: First Floor - Makerspace ....................................................................... 105
Image 39: Second Floor - Makerspace .................................................................. 107
Image 40: First Floor – Recreation and Aquatic Center ......................................... 111
Image 41: Second Floor – Recreation and Aquatic Center .................................... 112
Image 42: First Floor Section 1 – Daycare and Afterschool Area .......................... 115
xi
Image 43: First Floor Section 2 – Daycare and Afterschool Area .......................... 116
Image 44: First Floor - Administration .................................................................... 119
Image 45: CGC Ortho with CGC Logo ................................................................... 120
Image 46: CGC Site Plan ....................................................................................... 121
Image 47: Building Area Plan ................................................................................ 122
Image 48: Entire Building First Floor Plan ............................................................. 123
Image 49: Entire Building Second Floor Plan ........................................................ 124
Image 50: East Elevation ....................................................................................... 125
Image 51: West Elevation ...................................................................................... 125
Image 52: North Elevation ..................................................................................... 125
Image 53: South Elevation ..................................................................................... 125
Image 54: Front Entrance View ............................................................................. 126
Image 55: Daycare/Admin Rooftop View ............................................................... 126
Image 56: Garden/Urban Ag Center View ............................................................. 127
Image 57: Urban Ag Center/Gymnasium View ...................................................... 127
Image 58: St. Louis, Missouri and Fairground Park ............................................... 128
Image 59: Fairground Park with Site ...................................................................... 129
Image 60: Fairground Park Area ............................................................................ 130
Image 61: Fairground Park Area - Roads .............................................................. 130
Image 62: Fairground Park Area - Figure .............................................................. 131
Image 63: Fairground Park Area – Vacant Lots ..................................................... 131
Image 64: Fairground Park Area - Zoning.............................................................. 132
xii
Image 65: Fairground Park Area – Metro Bus Routes ........................................... 132
Image 66: Fairground Park Area – Amenities ........................................................ 133
Image 67: Fairground Park Area – Building Form Influence 1 ............................... 133
Image 70: Fairground Park Area – Climate Analysis ............................................. 135
Image 71: Average Seasonal Precipitation & Average Temperature Ranges........ 137
Image 72: Highest and Lowest Sun Angles in the Area ......................................... 137
Image 73: Wind Roses: Directions of the Wind during each Season ......................... 138
Image 74: Annual Wind Speed Frequency Distribution ............................................ 138
Image 75: Site Solar Diagram ................................................................................ 139
Image 76: Monthly Average Dry Bulb Temperature ............................................... 140
Image 77: Existing Site Conditions ........................................................................ 141
Image 78: Site Plan Landscaped ........................................................................... 143
Image 79: Baseline and Current scenario of Runoff, Infiltration, and Evap ............ 150
Image 80: SAM Photovoltaic System Report ......................................................... 155
Image 81: SAM Wind Generator System Report ................................................... 156
Image 82: SAM Wind Generator System Report ................................................... 157
Image 83: Commons Area Natural Ventilation Example ........................................ 159
Image 84: Typical Curtain Wall Attached Ventilation Unit Example 1 .................... 160
Image 85: Typical Curtain Wall Attached Ventilation Unit Example 2 .................... 162
Image 86: ClimateMaster Inc. Example Geothermal System ................................. 164
xiii
Image 87: CGC Designed Geothermal System ..................................................... 165
Image 88: Modern Day Fairground Park ................................................................ 174
Image 89: Modern Day Fairground Park - Features............................................... 175
Image 90: Redesign – Features Kept .................................................................... 175
Image 91: Redesign – Added Parking and New Fields .......................................... 176
Image 92: Redesign – Urban Farm Lots ................................................................ 176
Image 93: Redesign – Added Pavilions ................................................................. 177
Image 94: Redesign – Bear Pit Fairground Park Museum ..................................... 177
Image 95: Redevelopment Plan ............................................................................. 178
xiv
xv
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
The goal of this thesis at the beginning was to create a possible solution for
the lack of activities for the youth in the north section of St. Louis, Missouri. This is
something that I have experienced in my youth and have observed over time is a
large issue in many areas. This is especially true for youth who are living in poverty.
The concept of this thesis began to evolve as the research and observation began to
uncover new things about the area. The history, character, and potential of the area
started to reveal itself. With this came the major issues that the area has such as:
high crime, vacant land and buildings, lack of fresh food, lack of commercial
investment, and many other things. This combination ended up changing the original
goal of this thesis.
It became a community center that would address various issues in the area.
To further develop this idea, I developed a mission and vision statement for this
project to make this concept more concrete.
Mission
The Community Growth Center advocates for the betterment of the people of
St. Louis City and beyond, through the teachings of sustainable agriculture,
technology, the culinary arts, and the compassion for human existence.
1
Vision
The CGC and Fairground Park is to become a new center of St. Louis city. It
will give the city a new place of discovery and interaction. People who lived in the
city their whole life will now be able to experience nature, as they have never
experienced before. Where people can connect back with the earth, taking care of
their needs, but also gain knowledge that will let them become better versions of
themselves.
I hope that this gives you a glimpse into what kind of thesis this is. It is not just
a building; it is a look into the demographics and history of the Fairground Park
neighborhood and a search for what could assist and enliven the resident’s lives. As
well a building that would build a bright future for the surrounding area. I hope that
you enjoy!
2
CHAPTER 2
METHOD AND REASONING OF THESIS CHOICE
The focus of this chapter is a written expression of the thought process, that
has been condensed, to show how I developed and refined my thesis over time. It is
more about the research than the building itself.
At the start of my thesis I did not have a concrete project picked out but I did
have an idea. In my personal experience, I have noticed that there is one fault that
most cities share. These cities lack places for the youth to enjoy throughout the day
and evening. (youth is defined as persons between the age 15 and 24.) It is
something that is even experienced in youth going to college. This situation is not
evident by just looking at the conditions of the built environment. It is something that
is learned through the interaction of others and your own experience. It is something
that I have realized through experiencing it myself and having younger siblings.
This just not just occur in low-income areas either. This situation occurs in
any area that does not provide the youth with a variety of activities that they can be
involved in. This issue cannot be solved with a one size fits all solution. Each
municipality comes with its own issues and challenges that must be taken into
consideration when finding a solution to something like this. Here is where I needed
to find what place speaks to me most.
I began to look at cities around me where I have noticed. The cities that stood
3
out to me the most are: Carbondale, Illinois; Cape Girardeau, Missouri; and the north
side of St. Louis City, Missouri. I have lived in all of them except for St. Louis where I
go there regularly to visit my sister. I chose the north part of St. Louis City because
of the condition of this area. The need for development is clearly visible by just
looking at the area. There are a lot of vacant lots, boarded up homes, and few
commercial areas. This is where I choose to explore the issue.
I began with a question: What happened to North St. Louis City? This led to a
multitude of questions about the area. Such as: What was there historically? What
major events occurred there? What is this place missing? These questions led me to
picking Fairground Park as the focus. This park has a lot of history and took me
down a path of research just on the history of this area. Along with this history
research I considered the population and housing statistics of the area as well.
The above was written to show my process of my research up to the
development of the building. The information that I uncovered over that time is
included in the next few chapters.
4
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH: CONCISE HISTORY OF ST. LOUIS
Introduction to Modern Day St. Louis
St. Louis is located at the middle east part of Missouri against the banks of
the Mississippi River. Due to its location along the river it has always been a center
of activity. As of 2016 its population is 311,404 (United States Census Bureau,
N.D.). and it is a hub of major industries such as: Financial and Information Services,
Health Science and Services, Bioscience, and Multimodal Logistics and Advanced
Manufacturing (St. Louis Regional Chamber, N.D.). It is home to over 30 4-year
colleges and universities enrolling more than 125,000 students with the largest ones
being: Washington University in St. Louis, Saint Louis University, Webster
University, University of Missouri – St. Louis, and Maryville University of Saint Louis
(St. Louis Regional Chamber, N.D.). It is most known by the Gateway Arch erected
in 1965 and designed by Eero Saarinen, a world-famous architect (History of The
Gateway Arch, N.D.).
This monument created a literal interpretation of the gateway to west that St. Louis
has represented since its inception. St. Louis began as a trading post started by the
French trader, Pierre de Laclede.
Early Foundation of St. Louis City as a Trading Post
The foundations of St. Louis city began in New Orleans during 1763. At this
time, New Orleans was a French Colony when France ended its participation in the
5
Seven Years’ War with England. (Primm, Pg. 8) France had both its treasury and its
appetite for colonial investment depleted. The wartime restraints had caused strain
on the merchants, causing shortages thus leading to inflation. All of this forced the
French Governor of Louisiana, Jean Jacques d’ Abbadie, to grant trading
monopolies to certain merchants. This was all in the hope to restore prosperity to the
French colony of Louisiana. In the summer of 1763 Gilbert Antoine Maxent, a
leading merchant at the time, was given one of these monopolies that allowed them
to trade with the Indian tribes on the Missouri River and the west bank of the upper
Mississippi River for six years (Primm, 1998, Pg. 8).
Soon after acquiring this permission, Maxent went into partnership with Jean
Francois Le Dee and Pierre de Laclede, In which Laclede agreed to establish and
manage a trading post in the Illinois country. This trading post was in the current
location of the Central Business District of St. Louis (Wayman, N., 1978). Laclede
moved quickly after this partnership was formed and began preparations (Primm,
1998).
On August 10, 1763 Laclede along with his clerk-assistant Augustus
Chouteau and twenty or so boatmen left Louisiana up the Mississippi River with a
large cargo of merchandise. Their first destination was St. Genevieve so that they
can store the goods there for the winter. The amount of their goods was too large for
any of the buildings in St. Genevieve so Captain Neyon de Villiers of Fort de
Chartres made temporary storage spaces for the winter. While there Augustus
overheard Laclede talking to the Captain about the site for their fur trading post.
6
Laclede said that it “might become, hereafter, one of the finest cities of the continent,
so many advantages did it have ‘by its locality and central position” (Primm, 1998).
That December Laclede and Chouteau scouted from the mouth of the
Missouri down until Laclede found the perfect spot for his trading post. This spot was
located on a lowly slopped plateau that ends at a rocky bluff. This bluff has a break
in it allowing easy access to the river. The area had plenty of resources for building:
rock outcrops for stone, forests for timber, flowing springs, good drainage into the
river and no deep ravines that would make building difficult. (Primm, 1998.) This
area was ideal to start a village and in current times it is the Central Business District
of St. Louis City. This is where it all began for St. Louis. The trading post began to
grow over time with the population in 1772 being 577 including the slaves (Primm,
1998, Pg. 21).
Transition from a French to an American Colony
Due to the distance from the 13th colonies St. Louis stayed a French
occupied trading colony for a long time. This began to shift soon after the American
Revolution started in 1775 (Wallace, 2017). The French also declared war on Great
Britain around the same time (Primm, 1998, Pg. 38). This was because Spain had a
stake in the trading posts up the Mississippi River and they would want to keep them
away from British control. This led to the British, Spaniards, American Colonists,
Native American Tribes, and the French all fighting a war together on American land
(Primm, 1998, Pg. 42). Soon after the dust settled in 1783 the Americans declared
independence from Great Britain (Wallace, 2017). With its new-found freedom, the
7
American Colonies soon realized they had competition with the French in the west
part of North America. This is due to the French acquiring Louisiana from Spain.
This led to the Louisiana Purchase in 1801 where the United States bought
530,000,000 acres of land from France for $15 million (Office of the Historian, N.D.).
This is when St. Louis became an American city.
St. Louis Population Increase
With the war over and the United States now owning the Louisiana Purchase
territory the city of St. Louis began to grow. People from the 13 colonies began to
flow in for new opportunities and the central location of St. Louis on the Mississippi
River led to many merchants and artisans flocking here (Primm, 1998, Pg. 108). By
1815 St. Louis had a population of about 1,500. Five years later this jumped to
4,598, thus increasing the size quickly over the years (Primm, 1998, Pg. 107). This
population rise continued in an upward movement. The increase in population was
paired with a commercial business increase that led the population to rise even more
from 35,979 in 1840 to 184,313 in 1860. (1840 and 1860 census) The population
boom led to the building of theatres and fairgrounds throughout the city. The
performances help at these ranged from Shakespeare to American dramas such as
The Plains of Chippewa (Primm, 1998, Pg. 184). This rise in population also led to
the establishment of the October Mississippi Valley Fair (Primm, 1998, Pg. 185). The
fair was “inaugurated in 1856 by the St. Louis Fair Association on fifty-five acres
purchased from John O’ Fallon, on Grand Avenue at Natural Bridge Plank Road,
near the city’s northern boundary” at the time (Primm, 1998, Pg. 185). This is the
current location of the modern-day Fairground Park the location of this thesis.
8
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH: FAIRGROUND PARK HISTORY
Early Foundation of Fairground Park as a Fairground
Fairground park has been a center of activity even before it officially became
a fairground in 1856 (Primm, 1998). The earliest known fairs that were held on site
date back to 1822 (Wayman, 1970). In 1841 a yearly county fair opened at the St.
Louis horse race course. Then, in 1856 the October Mississippi Valley Fair was
inaugurated by the St. Louis Fair Association on fifty acres purchased from John O’
Fallon. The exhibits in these early years included farm products and livestock, wines
and whiskies, and the latest mechanical inventions at the time. The horse race track
that was located next to the fair at times filled with ten thousand people for the
saddle horse shows and the thoroughbred racing. The track attracted fast horses
from around the country to challenge the local breeds (Primm, 1998). This large
amount of community activity did not last much longer.
Fairground to Barracks and Back
In 1866 the American Civil war began and the army acquires the Fairgrounds
and transforms the fairgrounds and buildings into a training area and hospital called
Benton Barracks. However, after the Civil war ended in 1866, the fairs continued on
the site and increased in size (Wayman, 1970).
9
The Boom of the Fairgrounds
This time of peace led to more development in St. Louis which created an
increase of development in Fairground Park. In 1870, the large Amphitheatre was
constructed to host horse shows and sulky races.
Figure 1. Fairground Park in 1875
Four years later, in 1874, under the newly elected president of the
Fairgrounds, Julius S. Walsh, the Fairgrounds was opened to the public for daily
use. Along with this an art gallery, natural history museum, and a zoological garden
were constructed under his presidency in the park. For its time the park was rather
extensive because it included separate buildings for exhibits of birds, monkeys,
deer, bears, reptiles, and even outdoor spaces for animal exhibits. The only thing
10
existing today is the bear pit which has been bricked up and is used for storage
(Wayman, 1970).
Image 2. Bear Pit in 1876
Image 3. Bear Pit in 2017
11
Two years later the largest building on the site was constructed, a large
Mechanical Hall with dimensions of 150 by 250 feet. Another development to the
fairground was an art school that was attached to the hall. (Wayman, 1970). From
the start of the Fairground in 1856 to 1883 when an emphasis on horse racing was
placed over the fairgrounds, more than 1 million dollars (cost at that time) was spent
on all of the buildings and improvements of the grounds. The later year had an
average daily attendance of 40,000 (Wayman, 1970). This was one of the last glory
days of the fairgrounds.
Image 4. Entrance to Fairgrounds Park circ. 1880-1890
12
Image 5. Bear pit circ. 1890
Image 6. Gazebo in Fairground Park circ. 1894

13
Decline as a Fairground
The competition for the public eye led to the slow downfall of the Fairgrounds.
The Exposition Building located on the present site of the St. Louis city main public
library in downtown was built in 1884. The fall festival that used to be hosted at the
fairgrounds began to be hosted in this fully indoor exhibit hall. This attracted much of
the public due to an indoor exhibit hall being a rarity during that time (Wayman,
1970). By 1900 agricultural exhibits fell out of style for the citizens of St. Louis. This
led to the last fair in 1902 when auto racing was tried on the race track. This effort
failed mainly due to the preparations for the World’s Fair of 1904. The St. Louis
World’s Fair put an end to the Fairgrounds. The Fairgrounds laid abandoned until
1908 when the city purchased the Fairgrounds for $700,000 (Wayman, 1970).
14
Image 7. Whippleborn Fire Insurance Maps circ. 1895
Fairground to a City Park
Upon buying this piece of land, the city installed baseball diamonds and
tennis courts in Fairground Park. In the next year, the city removed all of the fair
structures except for the Bear Pit, which still exists today, from the zoological
gardens (Boudreau, 2014). The park was left undeveloped by the city until 1912
when they decided to build a large pool on the old site of the large circular
amphitheater. The city built a 440-foot diameter 5-acre public swimming pool that
opened to the public and attracted 500,000 people in the first 2-month season (The
Rotarian, 1914).
15
Image 8. Aerial of Fairground Park circ. 1926 - 1936
16
440-Ft Diameter 5 Acre Pool
Image 9. The Rotarian magazine Article circ. 1914
17
Image 10. Swimmers at Fairground Park Pool circ. 1920s
The pool had only been open for white patrons until 1949 when St. Louis city
officials decided to open the pool to the city’s black residents in a response to a
federal court holding that prohibiting black from using public golf courses was a
violation of the 14th amendment. This led to an event that eventually led to the
eventual closing of the once prosperous pool (Boudreau, 2014).
18
Fairground Park Pool Riot of June 21, 1949
Image 11. Children at the Fairground Swimming Pool circ. 1949
In the summer of 1949, opening day of the pool was the first day the pool was
racially integrated since its opening in 1912. Due to this occasion about thirty African
American children entered the pool and swam with the white children without any
issues. However, while they swimming a group gathered outside of the pool’s fence
and began shouting threats at the African American swimmers. This led to the police
being called in to escort the African American children home when the swimming
period ended at 3 p.m. By 6:45 p.m. things began to escalate into a conflict about
the integration (Wasko, N.D.).
19
Image 12. Cops Guarding Man Covered in Blood from the beating by the mob circ.
1949
Witnesses reported that a crowd of several hundred had gathered, only 20 to
30 of the people were African American youth. White youth with baseball bats
surrounded a group of African American youth and beat one of them until a police
officer fell on top of the youth to stop the attack. (cite History we chose to forget) By
this time, “according to the riot report suggests, the original crowd surged to the
thousands as other park users and baseball fans from the nearby baseball park
heeded the false cry that an African American boy had killed a white youth” (Wasko,
N.D.).
20
This led to violence that required nearly 150 police officers as relative order
was established by 10 p.m. but crowds did not disperse completely until after
midnight. The ending result of this race riot per official reports, seven people were
arrested with three being white and four black. Even with this all of this violence
there were only six people that were seriously injured, in which five were African
Americans. The mayor reinstituted the segregation policies to minimize the potential
for future violence (Wasko, N.D.).
In the following months, the mayor established the St. Louis Council on
Human Relations to investigate the incident. This council was headed by George
Schermer who was also the director of the mayor’s inter-racial committee in Detroit.
“Schermer cited “the failure of community leadership to prepare St. Louisans for the
adjustments which changing population, economic, and social conditions are forcing
upon the community” (Schermer, 1949).
The report concluded with 22 recommendations; foremost among them was
the statement that “the exclusion of any citizen from municipally-operated public
facilities because of his race is a violation of that person’s civil rights and contrary to
law”. Schermer also recommended a city-wide educational program to “cultivate
respect for individual civil rights and an expansion in the public schools of education
in democratic human relations. . . .” (Wasko, N.D.). The next year a U.S. District
judge ordered the City of St. Louis to open all public pools to all citizens.
In 1950 public pools were racially desegregated once more but without any
riots. This unfortunately led to a decline in pool attendance by 80% within that first
21
year. By 1954, the pool was closed by the city due to the pool not being profitable
enough to be maintained properly (Boudreau, 2014). Shortly after this in 1958 a new
pool was installed in Fairground Park right across from Beaumont High School
(Wasko, N.D.).
This Race Riot shows how divided this area of St. Louis was at the time and
possibly how divided the city is with this area today. I feel that the writer of the article
I sourced for this race riot put this in better words than I could.
” I do not mean to imply that white residents left the city because the pool was
integrated, but rather, I believe that the pool and the riot are symbolic of larger social
issues with respect to race in the mid-20th century. At the time, city officials sought
to quell fears of the effects of racial integration though the actions of city residents
suggest that the political rhetoric had little effect. In retrospect, it is clear that the
Fairground Park Pool riot was a more significant occurrence than city officials were
willing to admit. To ignore the riot is to ignore the history of race relations in St.
Louis. And to ignore the history is to ignore the legacy that shapes race relations in
our city today.”
Kate Boudreau, 2014
22
All White Neighborhood to an All-Black Neighborhood led by Racism
As in the previous few paragraph the effect of the 1950 racial integration of all
public pools in St. Louis including one of the largest and nicest pool in St. Louis at
the time was that attendance dropped to a point of not being able to run it. Before
this there was widespread redlining, the “practice of arbitrarily denying or limiting
financial services to specific neighborhoods, generally because its residents are
people of color or are poor.” (Hunt, N.D).This method was used through zoning
ordinances, realtor agreements, deed covenants, and HOLC ratings from before
1916 up to 1948 (Gordon, N.D.).
Here are some of the text used in a housing ordinance by United Welfare
Association from 1915, “Do you realize that at any time you are liable to suffer an
irreparable loss, due to the coming of NEGROES into the block in which you live or
in which you own property? The race question is one of vital interest to property
owners. A colored resident in your immediate neighborhood destroys the value of
your property immeasurably” (Gordon, N.D.). This shows the blatant use of racism
used in the area at the time. In appendix A and B I will also include other examples
from this time.
The redlining ending in 1948 with the landmark Supreme Court decision,
Shelley v. Kraemer, prohibited the enforcement of restrictive covenants, contracts
between white homeowners and neighborhood associations agreeing never to sell to
black families (Silva, 2017). Soon after this occurred there began a decrease in the
white population in St. Louis City and an increase in white population in the suburbs
23
of it. In return, there was an increase in African Americans in the city and a decrease
in their population in East St. Louis (Gordon, N.D.).
There may be correlations with there being nicer developments out in the
suburb and that is why the white population moved out there. Unfortunately, the
contracts used up to 1948 and their actions during the Fairground Park Riot showed
that racism was the biggest reasons many white citizens of St. Louis city moved
from these areas. More information on this is shown in the citation by Gordon, it is
an interactive map that gives much more information than I can cover.
Current Day Fairground Park
Current day Fairground Park has hardly developed since then though. There
are 4 baseball fields, a soccer field, football field, 3 basketball courts, 5 softball
fields, 8 tennis courts, 1 youth field, 1 small playground, a lake, and 1 pavilion. This
may seem like a lot but there is little parking near the areas of activity in the park.
There are also no pavilions where families can enjoy the park under during the
summer. The exception is the one on the corner of the site which is surrounded by
roads is only close to the roller-skating rink. To understand more about the park Ch.
22 will address the current state of the park and ideas for its redesign.
24
CHAPTER 5
RESEARCH: CURRENT DEMOGRAPHICS
Introduction
From the past two chapters, the city of St. Louis and Fairground Park
has some interesting history. The once great area of Fairground Park slowly
declined due to lack of investment, after the majority white population left. Sadly, this
is due to racism at the time which led to a massive change over a few years of white
citizens from the inner part of the city to the recently emerging suburbs. This began
the transition of the prominently white population to a prominently black population
(Gordon, N.D.). This leads to what this chapter is about, the current day, 2017,
demographics of Missouri, St. Louis City, North area of St. Louis city, and the
Fairground Park area (1.5-mile diameter from park). This chapter will provide data
on the population and then provide other comparisons of the areas.
25
Image 13. State of Missouri
Image 14. St. Louis City with north side of
St. Louis City Highlighted
Image 15. Fairground
Park
Area
26
Missouri Demographics
Missouri is in the middle of the United States and is known as the
“show-me state”. The average population density is 87 people per square mile and
this is due to the large areas of nature and farming throughout the state (Census,
2010).
27
2010 Census Data Missouri
Total Population: 6,083,672
African
White alone: 5,011,327 709,969
American alone:
American Indian and
25,808 Asian alone: 114,889
Alaska Native alone:
Native Hawaiian and

6,199 Other: 65,614
Other Pacific Islander alone:
Two or More Races: 149,866
Hispanic or Latino (Total)

Population: 240,413
Demographics (18 Years or Older)
Population: 251,755
Black or African
White alone: 122,651 11,315
American alone:
American Indian and
688 Asian alone: 7,882
Native Hawaiian and
64 Other: 2,787
Hispanic or Latino (18 Years or Older)
Population: 11,130
Housing Units
Total 2,746,644
Occupied 2,374,180 Vacant 372,464
Median Income
Year 2015 $50,200
Year 2012 $45,320

year 2008 $46,847
Table 1. 2010 Census Data Missouri
28
St. Louis City Demographics
St. Louis city is in the northeast side of Missouri and is known as the Gateway
to the west. Per the 2010 Census data, the average population density is 4,837
people per square mile.
29
2010 Census Data St. Louis City
Population: 319,294
Black or African
White alone: 140,267 157,160
American alone:
American Indian and
Native Hawaiian and
74 Other: 4,102
Population: 11,130
Population: 251,755
Black or African
White alone: 122,651 11,315
American alone:
American Indian and
Native Hawaiian and
64 Other: 2,787

Population: 7911
Housing Units
Total 176,002
Occupied 142,057 Vacant 33,945
Median Income
Year 2015 $37,948
Year 2012 $32,084
year 2008 $33,993

Table 1. 2010 Census Data St. Louis City
30
North side of St. Louis City Demographics
St. Louis city is in the northeast side of Missouri and is known as the Gateway
to the west. Per the 2010 Census data, the average population density is 3,867
people per square mile.
31
2010 Census Data of North St Louis City
Total Population: 64,264
Black or African
White alone: 1,384 61653
American alone:
American Indian and Alaska
141 Asian alone: 69
Native alone:
Native Hawaiian and Other
13 Other: 114
Pacific Islander alone:
Two or More Races: 890
Population: 458
Population: 46859
Black or African
White alone: 1251 44797
American alone:
105 Asian alone: 63
Native alone:
9 Other: 78

Population: 297
Housing Units
Total 35487
Occupied 24913 Vacant 10574
Median Income
Year 2015 $21,875
Year 2012 $23,714
Year 2008 $22,643

Table 2. 2010 Census Data of North St Louis City
32
Fairground Park Area Demographics
Fairground Park area is in the north side of St. Louis City and the project site
is located here. This area consists of the neighborhoods that are within a 1.5-mile
diameter of the middle of the park. Per the 2010 Census data, the average
population density is 5,138 people per square mile.
33
2010 Census Data Fairground Park Area (1.5 mile Radius)
Population: 35,063
Black or African
White alone: 925 33,461
American alone:
71 Asian alone: 38
Native alone:
5 Other: 58
Population: 249

Population: 25,550
Black or African
White alone: 830 24,289
American alone:
57 Asian alone: 36
Native alone:
3 Other: 34

Population: 157
Housing Units
Total 19,939
Occupied 13,912 Vacant 6,027
Median Income
Year 2015 $21,596
Year 2012 $23,198
year 2010 $23,101

Table 4. 2010 Census Data of the Fairground Park Area
34
Population Comparison
One of the most obvious points in this information is that St. Louis city
contains over 1/7 of all African Americans that live inside of Missouri. With half of
those living inside St. Louis city live in the Fairground Park area.
Table 5. 2010 Census Data – Population Comparison
American Community Survey Data
The following statistics come from the American Community Survey, which is
a national mandatory survey that is a long version of the U.S Census. It allows the
community and local governments and the private sector to see what an area
consists of. The link to this will be included in the citation at the end. The following
information is the comparison of the four areas of interest in a variety of categories.

35
Median Income Comparison
Yearly Median Income Earnings
Missouri St. Louis City North St. Louis City Fairground Park Area
2015 $50,200 $37,948 $21,875 $21,596

2012 $45,320 $32,084 $23,714 $23,198
2008 $46,847 $33,993 $22,643 $23,101
Table 6. 2015 American Community Survey – Median Income Comparison
There is some key data in this information above. There is a higher median
income in the entire state in comparison to St. Louis city. Over the years, the median
income has risen in both the state and city but it has lowered for North St. Louis city
and the Fairground park area. So even with inflation over the years the median
income has decreased in a 7-year period in the North St. Louis City and Fairground
Park area.
Household Types Comparison
Household Types (median % used in North STL and Fairground Area)
St Louis North St. Louis

Missouri Fairground
City City
Married Couple
48.3% 24.4% 14.0% 13.0%
Families
People Living
29.2% 44.4% 43.0% 41.0%
Alone
Other Families 16.4% 22.0% 38.0% 41.0%
Other Nonfamily
6.1% 9.2% 3.0% 5.0%
Households
Total Families 64.7% 46.4% 52.0% 54.0%

Table 7. A.C.S.- Household Type Comparison
36
Definitions
- Other Families: a family with either a single male or female householder
- Other nonfamily households: unmarried couple or non-related people
living together.
There are a few things that stick out in the information above. First there is a
large difference in Married Couple Families through the data. Second, by portion
there are more people living alone in St. Louis City than in the state. This stays close
to the same in the other parts of the city. Third, there is a large jump in Other Family
households when you compare St. Louis City to North St. Louis City. This increases
when you get to the Fairground Park Area. This means that in these areas there are
more single parents by portion than the rest of the city.
Education Levels Comparison
Education Levels (median % used in North STL and Fairground Area)
Missouri St Louis City North St. Louis City Fairground

Graduate Degree 10.0% 14.0% 6.0% 5.0%
Bachelor’s Degree 17.0% 18.0% 7.0% 7.0%
Associates Degree 7.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
Some College 23.0% 22.0% 25.0% 22.0%
High School
31.0% 24.0% 29.0% 33.0%
Diploma
less than High
12.0% 16.0% 23.0% 23.0%
School Diploma
U.S. Census Bureau, 2015 American Community Survey
Table 8. 2015 A.C.S. – Education Levels Comparison
There are a few obvious data points that are obvious in the information
37
above. There is a lack of higher education degrees being obtained in North St. Louis
City and the Fairground Park area within it. There is also a higher rate of attainment
of high school diplomas in the Fairground Park area than both St. Louis city and
North St. Louis City area.
Employment Status Comparison
Employment Status (median count used in North STL and Fairground Area)
North St. Louis

Missouri St Louis Fairground
City
Private Wage 2,284,777 / 123,070 /
241,6109 / 82% 4,909 / 78%
and Salary 82% 84%
Government 357,942 / 13% 18,111 / 12% 377,707 / 13% 1,226 / 19%
Self-
160,122 / 6% 5,805 / 4% 166,445 / 6% 184 / 3%
Employed
Table 9. 2015 A.C.S. – Employment Status Comparison
There is little to no difference in the above information.
38
Commuting by Mode Comparison
Commuting by Mode (median % used in North STL and Fairground Area)

St
Missouri North St. Louis City Fairground
Louis
Drove Alone 82.0% 72.0% 58.0% 52.0%
Carpooled 9.0% 9.0% 7.0% 11.0%
Public Transit (no

2.0% 9.0% 21.0% 24.0%
taxi)
Walked 9.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.0%

Other Means 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0%
Worked at Home 4.0% 3.0% 4.0% 3.0%
Table 10. 2015 A.C.S. – Commuting by Mode Comparison
One of the major differences in these areas is that public transit is used 12 –
15% more in North St. Louis City and the Fairground Park area.
39
Poverty Rates by Groups Comparison
The percentages in the table below are based on the percentage of the
population on the categories in the far left of the page. It is not meant as a
comparison or total of all the categories for each city. To show what the poverty
threshold is there is a diagram below this is to show the poverty threshold by family
size.
Poverty Rates (median % used in North STL and Fairground Area)

St
Missouri North St. Louis City Fairground
Louis
All Families 11% 22% 40% 33%
Female Householder
32% 39% 44% 38%
Families
Related Children under 18
21% 42% 60% 57%
years
People age 65 and over 9% 17% 29% 19%
Table 11. 2015 A.C.S. – Poverty Rates Comparison
This is one of the more drastic data charts showing a high percentage of
people living in poverty. I am only going to highlight a few. The total amount of
families doubles from Missouri to St. Louis city to North St. Louis city. It only goes
down from 40% to 33% from North to Fairground Park area. This means that the
percentage of people living in poverty increases as you get north side of St. Louis
city. What is even worse is that 60% of related children living together in the north
side of St. Louis city lives in poverty. This only drops to 57% in the Fairground Park
area.
40
Age Distribution Comparison
Due to the nature of using a median % of the neighborhoods in the North St.
Louis City Area and the Fairground Park area the numbers do not equal the exact
population in the area. However, it does help to give an overall idea of the population
in these areas.
Age Distribution (median % used in North STL and Fairground Area)
Missouri St Louis North St. Louis City Fairground

Under 18 23% 20% 23% 24%
18 to 24 10% 11% 14% 12%
25 to 44 25% 32% 21% 19%
45 to 64 27% 25% 27% 24%
65 and over 15% 11% 13% 16%
Table 12. 2015 A.C.S. – Age Distribution Comparison
There is little difference in the above information by portion.
Type of Housing Units Comparison
Type of Housing Units (median % used in North STL and Fairground Area)
Missour
St Louis North St. Louis City Fairground
i
Single-Unit 74.0% 47.0% 46.6% 46.6%
Multi-Unit 2.0% 53.0% 53.4% 53.4%
Mobile Homes 6.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Boat, RV, Van, Etc. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Table 13. 2015 A.C.S. – Types of Housing Units Comparison
The only large difference in this information is that Missouri consists mostly of
single unit homes.
41
Housing Occupancy Comparison
Housing Occupancy (median # used in North STL and Fairground Area)
Missouri St Louis North St. Louis City Fairground

Total 2,746,644 176,002 35,487 19,939
Occupied 2,374,180 142,057 24,913 13,912
Vacant 372,464 33,945 10,574 6,027
Table 14. 2015 A.C.S. – Housing Occupancy Comparison
This statistic is one of the most physically visible ones when you are driving
around North St. Louis City area and the Fairground Park area. Half of the houses in
these areas are vacant. This is including the lots that once had homes, but are now
vacant.
42
Occupancy w/ Housing Cost Burden Comparison
The percentages in the table below are based on the percentage of the
population on the categories in the far left of the page. It is not meant as a
comparison or total of all the categories for each city. It is meant to show the
percentage of the category in that area in which they spend more than 30% of their
total income for housing.
Occupancy w/ Housing Cost Burden (median # used in North STL and Fairground
Area)
St North St. Louis

Missouri Fairground
Louis City
Owners with Mortgage 27% 32% 48% 47%
Owners without Mortgage 12% 19% 27% 24%
Renters 49% 54% 67% 73%
Table 15. 2015 A.C.S. – Occupancy w/ Housing Cost Burden Comparison
The most drastic issue in the data above is that 48 – 73% of the people
living in the North St. Louis city area and the Fairground Park area that have a
mortgage or are renting use over 30% of their income to pay for those payments.
43
Conclusion
From the information above the North side of St. Louis city and the
Fairground Park area located within it has some statistics that are alarming. The
total population of African Americans in the North side of St. Louis city is 40% of the
total population of African Americans in the entire city of St. Louis. Of this population
in North St. Louis city area, 43% of the households are people living alone and 38%
of the households are single parents. Many of these families also have difficulty
affording housing. There are 48% of all owners with mortgages, 27% of owners
without mortgages, and 67% of all renters in the North side of St. Louis city that pay
30% or more of their income on house payments. Then you get into the poverty
rates. In the North side of St. Louis city, you have 40% of all families, 44% of all
single mothers, 60% of all related children under 18 years old, and 29% of all people
age 65 and over living at or under the poverty threshold. With this data showing
information that is hard to visibly see there is the vacant housing issue in the area. In
the North side of St. Louis City there are 10,574 vacant homes and 24,913 occupied
homes. The above information shows a lot about this area but it is not the full
picture. The next chapter goes into more detail into the analysis of North side of St.
Louis city.
44
CHAPTER 6
RESEARCH: NORTH SIDE ST. LOUIS ANALYSIS
Introduction
To get a better understanding of the north side of St. Louis city area beyond
the Census and American Community Survey, a deeper look into the neighborhood
was needed. Due to my lack of familiarity of the area I wanted to be as unbiased as
possible with my research, before deciding on an exact location for the site for the
thesis. Due to personal medical issues, I was unable to get much feedback from a
questionnaire that I created to gain information about the area. I did receive one
reply which helped mold the entirety of my design solution. The information in this
chapter goes into the vacant property owned by the city, youth arrest rates, low
income, low grocery store access, community gardens of the north side of St. Louis
City, and the one questionnaire answer.
45
46
Image 16. St. Louis City Owned Property
This diagram only displays the property owned by Land Reutilization Authority which is a part of the city of St.
Louis Government. So, it does not account for the vacant buildings and lots that are owned by private entities (City of St.
Louis, 2017).
47
Image 17. Age 14 to 24 Arrest Rate (2014)
The above information comes from the City of St. Louis P.I.E.R. Plan. It was created in 2015 as a plan for the city
“to reduce crime through Prevention, Intervention, Enforcement, and Reentry Strategies.”
48
Image 18. Low Income and Low Grocery Store Access
The above information combines the areas of low income with areas of low access to grocery stores. The low-
income information came from the USDA and the grocery stores came from my observations through google earth.
49
Image 19. Low Income and Low Grocery Store Access Proximity to Site
To give a better sense of proximity of the site in relationship to the rest of the north side of St. Louis city this graph shows
1/2 mile increments radiating from the site.
50
Image 20. Community Gardens Proximity to Site
The information above is to show the proximity that the site is from the community gardens in the region.
51
Image 21. Community Outreach Proximity to Site
The information above is to show the proximity that park is to places of community outreach in the area. These were
found through researching the various types of places in the area.
Larry Isom’s Reply to Questionnaire
To give me insight into the area I created a questionnaire to give to
community officials in the area. There is only one person that replied to this. His
name is Larry Isom and he is the Neighborhood Improvement Specialist for ward 4
which is located southwest of Fairground Park. Here is a summary of what the
community needs based on age group. His answers in its entirety will be located in
appendix B.
The youth in the area need a proper diet and access to healthy foods,
knowledge on how to plant and grow food, business and employment opportunities,
a building trade school, updated schools, and safety in the area.
The middle age population need business ownership in the area, jobs inside
and outside of the community, affordable housing with an emphasis on home
ownership of 65% or higher, retail stores in the area, trades schools and secondary
education, recreational activities, and safety in the area.
The senior citizens need food, medicine, home improvements, yard work, and
safety in the area.
52
Conclusion
The information that was shown in this chapter was an attempt to gain more
insight into the area. This area has a lot of vacant lots in each neighborhood with the
highest concentration around Fairground Park. This park is also adjacent to the
highest arrest rates of 14 – 24-year-old citizens in the North St. Louis area 2014.
Fairground Park is also in an area where there is only one grocery store. The area
northeast and southeast does not have a grocery store for more than a mile. The
community gardens in this area are spread out with a lack of them in the northwest
section and 1.5 miles southeast of Fairground Park. The community outreach in this
area is lacking as well. The southern and northwest area of the site has schools but
little else. There is a concentration of community outreach in a 1.5-mile radius from
Fairground Park.
Even though Fairground Park is a center of much more activity than the other
parts of the north side of St. Louis it is also the center of vacant lots, lack of fresh
food, and crime. This does not say that the park is the issue but it does show that
this area needs assistance and development. From the analysis of all the
information that has been covered; a community center seemed the most logical
path due to the lack of a center for the entire community.
53
CHAPTER 7
COMMUNITY CENTER: CASE AND PRECEDENT STUDIES
Introduction
An area such as the one around Fairground Park is lacking many things and
this creates a complex problem. You have a lack of business development, healthy
food choices, secondary learning opportunities, recreational activities, and many
other issues. This led me to decide that my solution will not fix everything but it
would have to be something that addresses many of these issues in one building.
Therefore, I concluded that a community center would be a solution.
What is a Community Center?
A community center has a variety of definitions. According to the Cambridge
University Press the definition for a community center is “a place where people who
live in an area can meet each other and play sports, take courses, etc.” This a very
broad definition that applies to many places. Let’s look at a more detailed definition
of a community center. According to the Los Angeles General Plan there are two
types of community centers. (City of Los Angeles, 2001) One is “a multi-use non-
residential center that encourages the development of professional offices, hotels,
cultural and entertainment facilities, in addition to the neighborhood uses.” The
second one is “A mixed-use center that encourages the development of housing in
concert with the multi-use commercial uses. Within the centers, the joint
development of public and private facilities, e.g., elementary school grades, libraries,
54
or public cultural facilities, in multi-use developments is encouraged” (City of Los
Angeles, 2001). These definitions bring a community center into a more complex
light. To give some context to community centers precedents and case studies are
ideal to show the depth and range of what community centers can be.
Community Center Precedent Studies
Precedent Study 1: 1912 Fairground Park Swimming Pool
Project: Fairground Park
Swimming Pool
Location: Fairground
Neighborhood, St Louis,
Mo (Middle South in park)
Time Existing: 1912- 1954
Size: 440-foot Diameter
(1912)- now (84’ by 110”)

Image 22. Children Swimming at Fairground Pool
Introduction.
The fairground pool was innovative during its time. It was 440 feet in
diameter, had a zero-depth entry noted above, and hosted between 10,000 and
12,000 swimmers per day in its early days’. It opened in 1912 and was the largest in
the world at the time at 440 feet in diameter. Even today you can see the imprint of
the old pool. The first 37 years of the pool it was open only for white patrons. It was
not until the summer of 1949 when it became open to the African American patrons
55
of the area (Bordeau, 2010). This was the beginning of the end for the original 440
feet pool.
Racial violence ensued.
On the summer opening day of July 4th, 1949, a group of African American
Children came in and people from outside of the park began to yell profanities at
them. This is when the police were called and escorted the 40 African American
Children out of the pool. After nightfall, there were bands of Caucasian children
searching the park and beating them up. It was not until 2 am when the police got
things under control. In all this chaos 15 people were hospitalized but no one was
killed. This event forced the mayor to segregate the pools once again (Silva, 2003).
Not long after this many whites boycotted it and due to the lack of attendance the
pool was closed in 1956.
Cultural diversity flip.
The diversity of the neighborhood is much different now from back in 1949.
Beaumont school, which is right across from the school and still stands today, was
all white. In 1945 African Americans made up 13% of the St Louis City Population.
By 1957, they made up 30% of the city population (Silva, 2003). As the African
American population increased the population of Caucasians decreased. This was
due to them moving out into the suburbs of St Louis City and the racial divide
between them.
56
Conclusion.
The idea of a public pool is a place where everyone can participate. The
original pool was the largest of its kind at the time and served not only the
neighborhoods around it but the city itself. It was innovative for its time and even
today it would still be impressive. I feel that even with its rough past and negative
energy this pool represents the continued social issues of our time. These social
issues still exist but they are less direct. The destruction of this pool was not due to
any defect in it. The eventual downfall of this pool was the social divide that existed
within society. This is something that could be addressed in a public place such as a
community center and hopefully continue to thrive for a long term. I feel that many
gathering activities such as a social meet and greet, bi-annually, of the participants
and volunteers of the facility to create a sense of family and unity and to breakdown
preconceive biases and stereotypes could be an important activity.
57
Community Center Case Studies
Case Study 1: Ecology Center Non-Profit
Project: Ecology Center
Nonprofit
Location: Berkeley,
California
Time Existing: 1969 to
current
Size: Locally impacted and
beyond
Courtesy of http://ecologycenter.org/about/
Introduction.
The Ecology Center’s “mission is to inspire and build a sustainable, healthy,
and just future for the East Bay, California, and beyond.” Their services include:
“farmers’ markets, produce stands, residential curbside recycling, classes and
workshops, Youth Environmental Academy, help desk and hotline, book & DVD
library and seed library, store for sustainable living, and a demonstration house and
garden.” They have been active in the community since the opening in 1969 when
they began the communities meeting place (Ecology Center, N.D.).
Impact.
To show the impact that this one non-profit has in a page let alone 20 pages
would be impossible. So, I am just going to go over a few major things that they do
and its impact based on the tabs on their website starting with food. The Farm Fresh
58
Choice program is a food justice program that engages low-income residents in their
city. This program helps these citizens through youth empowerment, nutrition
education, and weekly produce stands. They have operated the city of Berkeley’s
Curbside Recycling Program since 1973. This is their push to continue towards their
goals of zero waste and natural resource conservation. The Ecology Center runs a
demonstration home and garden in North Berkeley to show how we should change
to adapt to climate change. This house has solar panels, water saving devices,
natural and recycled materials, salvaged cabinets, and much more. Along with
everything above they include a large variety of resources relating to each category.
Conclusion.
The Ecology Center is an expansive non-profit that works to change the world
in many ways. This is something that I feel a community center should do. It should
function in various ways to help the community and beyond.
59
Conclusion: A Community Center for Fairground Park
The precedent and case studies gave me some insight into what a community
center is and what could be done for this community. The research and the
questionnaire allowed me to gain knowledge about the community beyond my
personal observations. Within these two sources of information a basis for the
Fairground Park community center evolved. This community center contains: a
makerspace facility, daycare, conference center, recreation and aquatics center,
catering/teaching kitchen, and an Urban Agriculture center. Before going into the
breakdown of each one of these, this is in chapter 8, the belief structure and the
vision of the community center is something that needs to be expressed. What does
this community center stand for and what is its vision for the future?
60
CHAPTER 8
CENTER NAME, IDEALOGY, AND IMAGE
Introduction
When it comes to a company all of them have something that they stand for.
They have a name, guiding principles, ethos, future goals, and/or image that guides
them. These are also used to show others who they are, what they stand for, and
show what they want for the future. Due to the what this building represents there
needs to be something that represents this building and its goals. Thus, I created a
name, mission and vision statement, and a logo for it.
Name Development
A name for a multiple functioning building such as this needs something that
encompasses the entire building. To decide on a name there needed to be a few
deciding factors. It needs to connect with the entire facility. It needs to connect with
the community. It needs to reflect the mission and vision statement. In this case the
name evolved before the mission and vision statement but that is ok due to the
simplicity of a name. Here are some names that I came up with: Community Grow
Center, Community Green Learning Center, Urban Renewal Center, Urban Growth
Community Center, and Community Growth Center. These came from the spaces
inside the building and what they represent. The one that is the most complete
combination is Community Growth Center. The building is for the community and by
the community and the functions inside of this building are meant to help spur
61
growth for the community in a variety of ways. The name is important but the
mission and vision statement gives a more detail about the building.
Mission & Vision Statement
A mission statement “describes what the group is going to do and why it's
going to do that” (University of Kansas, 2017). It is a concise and outcome – oriented
statement showing how your organization plan to reach these goals. A vision
statement is your organizations dream for the future. It is what the world would be
like if the most important issues to the organization were perfectly addressed
(University of Kansas, 2017). A vision statement tends to be longer and go into more
depth than a mission statement, Due to this being a thesis done by one person I had
to look at this in a holistic way. I had to look at what each part of the building
represented and show that in these two statements.
One the best mission and vision statements that connected with this project was one
from Spoutwood Farms in Glen Rock, Pennsylvania. Their mission statement is,”
Spoutwood Farm Center demonstrates, promotes and advocates for our
interconnected sustainable partnership with Nature.” Their Vision statement is much
longer,” Spoutwood Farm Center is a place of beauty, respite and renewal, which
inspires and teaches people to reconnect to Nature by honoring the living web of our
particular place on earth, through celebration, wonder, and stewardship.
Spoutwood’s heart-felt belief is that through fresh, locally-grown food and effective
plant-animal-people partnerships with the land we will build a vital, just and
sustainable world for the 21st century” (Spoutwood Farms). In a very short you can
62
get a sense of what they represent. Now I went through a few iterations of both
statements but this is the final result.
Mission Statement
“The Community Growth Center advocates for the betterment of the people of St.
Louis City and beyond through the teachings of sustainable agriculture, technology,
the culinary arts, and the compassion for human existence.”
Vision Statement
“The Community Growth Center and Fairground Park is to become a new center of
St. Louis city. It will give the city a place of discovery and interaction. Where people
who lived in the city their whole life can experience nature that they have never
experienced before. Where people can connect back with the earth but also gain
knowledge that will let them become better versions of themselves due to this
connection.”
Logo Development
The logo of a building, company, or group is the combined concept of the
name and mission and vision statement. This is how most companies are
recognized. The most well-known and affective are the logos of Apple and Nike.
These two logos reflect the values of their company. The Apple logo is simple, clean,
and modern. Now this is not done on its own but combined with the products it
produces. Nike is more direct with its logo and its name. The name Nike comes from
the Greek goddess of victory and speed. Then the swoosh promotes a quick
movement.
63
From these examples, I wanted something simple but still representing the
organization and business. I took the name Community Growth Center and
condensed it into CGC.
This is clean and simple but it misses the main mission of the building. To
help everyone and create a better world for everyone.
This final logo represents the building, it is something simple, it connects with the
name of it, and it includes a variety of colors showing there is inclusivity to it.
64
Image 23. CGC Logo
Conclusion
The logo of a building, company, or group is the combined concept of the
name and mission and vision statement. This is how most companies represent their
image other than their products. This building, even though it is not built, needs
something to represent it due to its complexity.
65
CHAPTER 9
OVERALL BUILDING PROGRAM
Introduction
The Community Growth Center is a massive center equaling to 125,734 square
feet without considering the 68,256 square feet of walkable roof area that contains
34,709 square feet of green roof. Inside this center are 9 areas that make up the
entire building. This chapter is used to concisely explain the justification for each area
and to give a breakdown of the spaces in each of the areas in the building.
Reasoning of Each Area of the Building
The building and its site represents what the mission and vision statement is.
This building and the site is broken up into individual areas that all serve different
functions for the community. These functions are a response to the history,
conditions, and the needs of the community around it. So, they should be explained
together to give a complete image of what this community center accomplishes for
the community it is in. That is why this is included in this chapter than in each
individual chapter of the area.
66
Area Response to the History, Conditions, and Need
The administration area is where the business side of the
Admin
facility is handled.
The daycare facility gives the community a safe area for the
parents to drop off their children to go to work or to use the
rest of the building. It is also focused on teaching the
Daycare
children about healthy food and growing food. There is also
a afterschool program for youth during the summer and
after school.
The makerspace gives the community a location to gain

technical skills with woodworking, metal, and technological
Makerspace
equipment. It also would be a training area for using
computers.
The commons area gives the community a safe place to

Commons Area
come and enjoy throughout the day.
Rec and Aquatic The rec and aquatic center gives the community a place to
Center get exercise but also build community.
The teaching/catering kitchen helps teach the community

Teaching/Catering
how to prepare fresh vegetables from the urban ag. Center
Kitchen
and would host free meals for the community.
Urban Agriculture The urban ag center provides job training, fresh food, and a
Center safe place for the community.
Table 16. Areas and their Purpose
67
Program: Administration
ID # Space Location Square Footage (ft2)

A 1- 1 Conference Level 1 192
A1 - 2 Financial Level 1 194
A1 - 3 Conference Level 1 192
A1 - 4 Break and Copy Level 1 908
A1- 5 Daycare Exec Level 1 192
A1 - 6 Makerspace Exec Level 1 192
A1 - 7 Event Coordinator Level 1 196
A1 - 8 Office Level 1 144
A1 - 9 Center Director Level 1 264
A1 - 10 Workstations Level 1 144
A1 - 11 Restroom Level 1 48
A1 - 12 Restroom Level 1 48
A1 - E Egress Stair Level 1 243
A1 - H Hallway Level 1 677
A1 - I Front Desk / Secretary Level 1 90
TOTAL AREA SQUARE FOOTAGE 3,724
Table 17. Schedule of the Administration Area
Program: Daycare
ID # Space Location Square Footage (ft2)

D1 - 1 Daycare Check-in Level 1 198
D1 - 2 Warming Kitchen Level 1 388
D1 - 3 Infant 2m - 12m Level 1 757
D1 - 4 Toddler 1 - 3 yr. Level 1 833
D1 - 5 Laundry/Janitor Level 1 199
D1 - 6 Restroom Level 1 42
D1 - 8 Teachers Workroom Level 1 514
D1 - 9 Storage Level 1 212
D1 - 10 Sick Bay Level 1 99
D1 - 11 Preschool 4 & 5 Level 1 1281
D1 - 14 Computer Lab Level 1 246
68
D1 - 15 After School 6-15 Level 1 1378
D1 - 18 Multimedia Level 1 211
D1 - 19 After School Check-in Level 1 128
D1 - 20 Lounge Level 1 609
D1 - H Hallway Level 1 819
D1 - H Hallway Level 1 783
Table 18. Schedule of the Daycare Area
Program: Makerspace
ID # Space Location Square Footage

M1 - 1 Computer Lab Level 1 440
M1 - 2 Restroom Level 1 57
M1 - 3 Restroom Level 1 57
M1 - 4 Workstations Level 1 330
M1 - 5 Laser Cutters Level 1 350
M1 - 6 Workstations Level 1 328
M1 - 7 Lounge Level 1 851
M1 - 8 CNC's Level 1 635
M1 - 9 Open Work Area Level 1 2038
M1 - 10 Woodshop Level 1 1077
M1 - 10A Air Handler Level 1 128
M1 - 11 Welding Level 1 330
M1 - 12 Storage and Loading Level 1 468
M1 - 13 Paint Booth Level 1 165
M2-1 Conference Level 2 278
M2-2 Storage/Server Closet Level 2 192
M2-3 Restroom Level 2 61
M2-4 Computer Classroom Level 2 960
M2-5 STEAM Storage Level 2 200
M2-6 STEAM Classroom Level 2 680
M2-7 Classroom Level 2 480
M2-8 Lounge Level 2 297
M2-9 Storage Level 2 96
M2-H Circulation Level 2 1293
Table 19. Schedule of the Makerspace Area
69
Program: Commons Area

C 1- Commons Level 1 8436
C1 - 1 Lobby Level 1 970
C1 - 2 Storage Level 1 167
C2-1 Lounge Level 2 327
C2-2 Egress Stairs Level 2 263
C2-3 Storage Level 2 182
C2-4 Conference Level 2 398
C2-5 Conference Level 2 398
C2-6 Classroom Level 2 320
C2-7 Classroom Level 2 324
C2-8 Game Room Level 2 2182
C2-9 Outdoor Patio Level 2 654
C2-10 Small Group Room Level 2 144
C2-16 Large Meeting Level 2 631
C2-17 Egress Stair Level 2 399
C2-19 Kitchenette Level 2 194
C2-20 Theatre Level 2 204
C2-21 Restroom Level 2 47
C2-25 Theatre Level 2 204
C2-H Circulation Level 2 1370
C2-C Circulation Level 2 5828
Table 20. Schedule of the Commons Area
70
Program: Recreation Center

R1 - 1 Family Changing Level 1 692
R1 - 2 M. Locker Level 1 961
R1 - 3 W. Locker Level 1 960
R1 - 4 Support Level 1 727
R1 - 5 Weight Room Level 1 1617
R1 - 6 Boxing Room Level 1 384
R1 - 7 Offices Level 1 384
R1 - 8 Storage Level 1 1082
R1 - 9 Gymnasium Level 1 22540
R2-1 Storage Level 2 250
R2-2 Cardio Level 2 589
R2-3 Group Workout Level 2 571
R2-4 Egress Stair Level 2 203
R2-5 Treadmills Level 2 595
R2-C Circulation Level 2 2684
R1 - H Circulation Level 1 2172
R1 - E Egress Stair Level 1 212
Table 21. Schedule of the Recreation Center
Program: Aquatic Center

AQ1 - 1 Office Level 1 90
AQ1 - 2 Multi-Room Level 1 374
AQ1 - 3 Multi-Room Level 1 408
AQ1 - 4 Pool Area Level 1 5041
AQ1 - 5 Storage Level 1 189
Table 22. Schedule of the Aquatic Center
71
Program: Teaching Kitchen

K-1 Dining Level 1 1761
K-2 Teaching Kitchen Level 1 2732
K-3 Janitorial Level 1 52
K-4 Restroom Level 1 56
K-5 Restroom Level 1 53
K-6 Kitchen Resources Level 1 393
K-7 Storage Level 1 411
K-8 Classroom Level 1 528
K-9 Conference Level 1 300
K - 10 Conference Level 1 300
K - 11 Classroom Level 1 480
TOTAL AREA SQUARE 7,066
FOOTAGE
Table 23. Schedule of the Teaching Kitchen
Program: Urban Agriculture Center

UAG1 - 1 UAC Hall Level 1 3435
UAG1 - 2 UAG Office Level 1 438
UAG1 - 3 Harvest and Processing Level 1 920
UAG1 - 4 Mothering Area Level 1 623
UAG1 - 5 Tool Room Level 1 343
UAG1 - 6 UAG Greenhouse Level 1 2789
H-1 Produce Prep & Level 1 722
Packaging
H-2 Animal Prep Level 1 137
H-3 Cold Storage Level 1 106
H-4 Dry Storage Level 1 106
H-5 Office/Lounge Level 1 492
H-6 Restroom Level 1 56
G-1 Goat Indoor Area Level 1 1030
G-2 Feed Storage Level 1 408
G-3 Milking and Health Level 1 1042
UAG2 - 1 Multi-use Room Level 2 3155
UAG3 - 1 Indoor Edible Garden Roof 1836
Lounge
UAG3 - 2 Rooftop Greenhouse Roof 5845
72
UAG3 - 3 Rooftop Greenhouse Roof 2299
Lounge
UAG3 - 4 Circulation Roof 2411
UAG3 - 5 Egress Stair Roof 211
UAG3 - 6 Egress Stair Roof 220
Table 24. Schedule of the Urban Agriculture Center
Program: Combined Area Square Footage
The combination of each of these areas makes up the entire CGC.
AREA SQ FT
Admin 3,724
Commons 24,649
Daycare 8,934
Teaching Kitchen 7,066
Makerspace 10,736
Recreation Center 35,899
Aquatic Center 6,102
Urban Ag Center 28,624
TOTAL SQ FT 125,734
Table 25. Combined Square Footage of all Areas
73
Program: Gross Building Square Footage
To give a more concise view of the building a gross building square footage
schedule was created. It is broken down between indoor and outdoor areas and
includes the main mechanical area of the building.
Name Level Area (SF)
0 - Mech Area Below Ground Mech 11,675

Floor
1 - Area Level 1 88,687
2 - Outdoor Area Level 2 14,965
2 - Interior Area Level 2 32,182
Roof - UAG Area Roof 1,872
Roof- Greenhouse Area Roof 9,427
Roof – Green roof Area Roof 52,440
OUTDOOR TOTAL 67,405
INDOOR TOTAL 132,168
OVERALL TOTAL 212,305
Table 26. Area Schedule (Gross Building)
Conclusion
These areas contain a variety of spaces and all of them are have a purpose in
addressing the many issues in the Fairground Park area. The rest of the chapters give
insight into these areas and how they address these issues.
74
CHAPTER 10
BUILDING AREA: COMMONS AREA
Introduction to the Commons Area
The Commons Area of the Community Growth Center is the core of the
building. It provides a place of gathering and engagement in the building and
community. The Commons Area is located in the building on the first and second
floor and gives a physical connection between every area in the building. This
chapter will go over the purpose, areas, and the overall focus of the Commons Area.
Along with showing the plans of the entire commons area.
Image 24. Commons West View Rendering
75
Purpose of the Commons Area
The Commons Area is different from the rest of the areas in the CGC. Its
focus is to provide an area for gathering, entertainment, and a connection between
the areas in the CGC. Unlike the other areas of the building the commons area is
geared to address the issue of safety in the community by providing a safe space for
the youth and community to utilize all year around.
Area of Gathering
One of the key solutions to provide a space of interaction and safety is by
having a variety of settings for gathering. Throughout the commons area there are a
variety of such spaces. These such areas allow for a variety of interactions to occur.
There are areas of raised seating where a group can work on things together. There
is an area that is next to the curtain wall that is like a living room with couches and
end tables for just a casual gathering. On the second floor, there are raised balcony
seating that allows individuals to work on things but still enjoy the action going on in
the commons area. There is also a covered outdoor patio area where you can enjoy
the sights of the site from under cover. Nearby this patio area there is the group of
conference rooms. These conference rooms are available to rent out for the
community. This is also an area that could be expanded into for future expansion in
the CGC. These spaces offer a safe place for the entire community to enjoy.
Entertainment
The area around the Fairground Park lacks many places for entertainment
thus most people must go outside of the area for any kind of entertainment. Thus, it
76
makes sense to provide a variety of spaces that anyone in the community can come
enjoy. On the first floor of the commons area there are pool tables and the seating
areas mentioned in the previous section. On the second floor there is much more.
There is a game area that includes 3 pool tables, 3 ping pong tables, a kitchenette,
and 2 theatre rooms. Now these are not the only spaces for entertainment in the
CGC that is what makes the entire CGC great. It offers a variety of spaces that
people with all types of interests can find something they like.
Connection of all CGC Areas
The commons area is a space that is what physically connects every area of
the CGC together. Instead of creating a simple hallway with a curtain wall facing the
Daycare play area a space was created that is usable and promotes the interaction
of the community with itself was made. It connects each area horizontally and
vertically with stairs and the start, middle, and end of the commons area. This allows
multiple means of access from the first floor to the second floor. Which is connected
to the other parts of the CGC.
Floor Plans and Areas of the Commons Area
The Commons Area consists of a total of 24,649 square feet of the total
125,734 square footage building space. This is split up between the first floor with
9,573 square feet and the 2nd floor with 15,076 square feet.
77
Image 25. Commons 1st Floor Area
Image 26. Commons 2nd Floor Area
78
Image 27. Commons 2nd Floor Conference Rooms
Commons Area Conclusion
The Commons area is a very simple area in context of the rest of the areas in
the CGC. It is just as important as the other areas though. It provides a place to
gather and build the community. It is also the place in the building that has extra
room to allow for expansion in the future. This flexibility gives this area of the CGC a
vital part of the center.
79
CHAPTER 11
BUILDING AREA: TEACHING KITCHEN
Introduction to the Teaching Kitchen
The Teaching Kitchen is the hearth of the Community Growth Center. The
teaching kitchen provides a place for the community to host parties, take teaching
classes, learn to prep and cook fresh food, eat during free Urban Agriculture center
meals, and feed kids at the daycare. It is located at the west end of the community
center next to the Urban Agriculture Center and the gymnasium. This chapter will go
over the purpose, areas, and the overall focus of the teaching kitchen.
Purpose of the Teaching Kitchen
The teaching kitchen focuses on several issues that were mentioned in
chapter 6 and working to accomplish the mission and vision statement of the
Community Growth Center. These issues are lack of a proper diet and healthy food,
employment opportunities, and a safe place.
Lack of a Proper Diet and Healthy Food
Even with the graphic on page 50 in chapter 6 showing that there are a lot of
community gardens in the area, this is not the reality there. Along with the
information from Larry Isom, the Neighborhood Improvement Specialist for Ward 4
which is located southwest of Fairground park, these community gardens are not
able to produce enough food for the entire area throughout the year. This same
80
graph also shows that there are few grocery stores in this area. When you combine
these together you have an area that is lacking in steady availability to fresh food.
This is where the teaching kitchen will come into action. The teaching kitchen will
utilize its resource room, kitchen, and the CGC’s conference rooms to run free of
charge year around food and health classes. These classes would educate the
public about healthy food choices, budgeting for healthy food, and teach them how
to cook and preserve food. The same students in this program would also be
involved in helping run the kitchen during events to help build their culinary skills
over time. This is where the local restaurants come in.
The chefs of these restaurants could use the facilities in exchange for
teaching the courses and/or volunteering during the free meals cooked for the
community. If one of the students see that they want to get into the culinary arts they
could end up working under the chef and providing them with a job and possible
career.
Lack of Employment Opportunities
Throughout the facility, there are many opportunities for jobs and job creation
and the kitchen is no different. Having students of the food and health classes
becoming employees of the chefs in the city is only one way that employment would
occur through the teaching kitchen. The kitchen could become a place where
someone who wanted to start a catering business could operate in to get a kickstart
on their business. There would also be a few regular staff that would operate the
facility that would give jobs to the public.
81
Safe Place
As a part of the Community Growth Center the teaching kitchen provides a
safe place for the public to interact, grow, and learn at. Even though it is the smallest
of the area in the CGC it is still important due to its connection to the community
through food.
Spaces of the Teaching Kitchen and their Function
The teaching kitchen consists of a total of 7,066 square feet of building space
that is split up between the kitchen, the kitchen resources room, and the dining
room.
Image 28. Kitchen Floor Plan

82
The Kitchen
The teaching kitchen is a 2,700-square foot kitchen that contains four cooking
stations, a serving area, a bakery, a dry goods area, a walk-in cooler and freezer, a
prep area, and a ware washing area. This area is designed so that the workflow is
as smooth as possible.
Layout and general workflow design.
Image 29. Kitchen Layout
The general flow would be bringing ingredients to the prep area and the
prepped food would go back into the cooler or to the cooking stations, depending on
the need. Then the prepped ingredients and ingredients from the dry storage would
be dispersed to the cooking station. The dishes from the ware washing area would
83
be brought to the front serving area or in front of the serving area, depending on the
type of event going on. Then when the person is done eating they would bring the
dirty plates to the drop off at the ware washing area. The cooking stations would also
bring their dirty dishes to the ware washing area as well.
Kitchen Resources Room
The kitchen resources room is located adjacent to the kitchen. It is where the
classes would be located at so that the students can get familiar with kitchen wares
before even going into the kitchen. It also doubles as an office and planning room for
the kitchen.
The Dining Room
The official dining room is in front of the teaching kitchen and at its current
layout can hold 90 people. This is not the only area for eating though. Throughout
the Community Growth Center there are plenty of areas to host dinners at. The
biggest of these spaces would be the hall in the Urban Agriculture Center that is
3,435 square feet in area. So, these areas are an extension of the dining room.
Teaching Kitchen Conclusion
The teaching kitchen is a vital part of the entire Community Growth Center. It
is where the public can gather and share good food. It teaches people to learn how
to cook their own food and have a healthy diet. More importantly, it helps the
community to grow together in health and happiness.
84
CHAPTER 12
BUILDING AREA: URBAN AGRICULTURE CENTER
Introduction to the Urban Ag Center
The Urban Agriculture center, UAC from now on, is the community workhorse
of the Community Growth Center. The UAC provides fresh food, learning and job
opportunities, gathering areas, and a place of relaxation for the community. It is
mainly located at the west end of the community center and oversees the rest of the
site. This chapter will go over the purpose, areas, and the overall focus of the Urban
Agriculture Center.
Purpose of the Urban Ag Center
The UAC focuses on several issues that were mentioned in chapter 6. As well
as fulfilling the mission and vision statements of the CGC. These issues are the
vacant lots in the area, the lack of fresh food, lack of commercial investment, the
lack of employment opportunities, and lack of safe areas in the community. These
issues are wide ranging but the UAC was designed to give the community a place to
learn and grow on the site and in the community.
Vacant Lots and Lack of Fresh Food
The UAC is designed to teach people who come there to learn how to plant,
grow, preserve, and cook food for their self. This can lead to these people buying
vacant lots and creating their own gardens. In the Fairground Park area, there are a
total of 322.19 vacant lots owned by the city of St. Louis, refer to chapter 6 on page
85
47. Now not all of these should be turned into gardens but there could be a 1/10 of
these that could be turned into a garden. The rest should be dedicated to
development. This would give around 32 acres of gardens for this area that would be
able to produce fresh food, jobs, and build up the area. These gardens could be
supported by the UAC, turned into a business ran by the public, and/or turned into a
CSA.
Commercial Investment and Employment Opportunities
The prospect for commercial investment and employment through the UAC
would have a wide range. There would a full-time staff and volunteers that would
keep the entire facility running and the animals cared for year around but there are
other areas outside of the site that would create jobs. When it comes to the vacant
lots the UAC would train the public in how to grow and manage an urban garden.
This would occur on the UAC facilities and site then eventually move to the lot where
they would like to start growing at. Then the public can operate the garden as they
please using the UAC as a source of help when they need it. The potential for food
on a single lot that someone grows on can be huge when designed well. A garden
the size of one standard city lot can produce a lot of food and the following figure is
their layout (Carpenter and Rosenthal, 2012).
86
Image 30. Ideal Empty Lot Farm
87
With this quantity of food, the options vary in what can be done with the
products harvested. These farmers can either farm the land for their family and
friends, turn it into a business and sell to the public, expand and sell to restaurants,
and/or create a CSA.
A person may feel that growing for their family and friends is enough and do
not want to deal with the hassles of selling to the public. For the ones that want to do
this they can eventually lead to doing it fulltime. This would create a source of job
opportunities and job creation for the citizens of the area that cannot find jobs in the
area and would like to have their own business. This is where the UAC would come
in. It would help these future business owners learn what it takes to run a business
and urban garden. Due to the UAC functioning as a business its own rights due to
running as a non-profit to serve the community it still needs to profit to keep growing
so this business structure would be available to help future business owners
establish and grow their business. This business urban farms would probably be
sought out by local restaurants for products due to their locality.
Restaurants are a buyer and seller of food. So, when it comes to sourcing
their produce and meats a local source is more enticing due to the freshness of the
less traveled food. The only downside usually is the costs that usually come along
with buying from a farm outside of a city but is still considered local. That is when
these urban lot farms come into play. Due to the low cost of the land and prime
location in the city these small lots are ideal for chefs to source food from. These
restaurants could invest into these urban farm businesses by buying produce from
88
them. The location of these urban farm businesses could even spur commercial
development into the commercial areas in their areas by bringing restaurants into
these areas. Which would spur other development as well. The other option from
selling to restaurants would be for people to establish a CSA.
Community Supported Agriculture
A CSA is a business model that is used by some farms. CSA is when people
in the community pay ahead of a farms season to receive shares of a farms crops
when harvesting comes around (USDA, N.D). This type of farm benefits both sides
of the transaction. The shareholders of the system receive locally grown food
throughout the harvest season and are connected directly with their foods
production. The farmers of this system are provided with working capital in advance,
financial stability, and better prices for crops. With the sheer acreage of vacant land
in the area a CSA would be easy to do if a group of people would gather funding
together to start one.
Lack of Safety
The above activities and commercial development would help create a more
safer community by taking these vacant lots and empty store fronts to create a more
lively and active neighborhood. The UAC and the CGC building, would be safe place
for the entire community to come and enjoy the facilities. This brings us to the
various spaces that make up the UAC.
89
Spaces of the Urban Agriculture Center and their Functions
The UAC consists of a total of 28,624-square feet of building space. This is
split up between the main 18,680-square foot building, the 5,845-square foot rooftop
greenhouse that is located above the recreation and aquatic center, the harvest
outbuildings, the livestock buildings, the orchard, and the 1.3-acre garden.
Main Urban Agriculture Building
The main building of the urban agriculture center has a square footage of
18,680 and rises 3 floors up to the main roof of the community center. On the first
floor, there is a large open hall, an office, a harvest and processing area, tool
storage, and a greenhouse. On the second floor, there is a group gathering space.
On the third floor, there is a large lounge.
Image 31. UAC Hall Rendering
90
First floor.
Image 32. First Floor – Urban Agriculture Center
The first floor of the urban agriculture center contains some of the main
spaces that are used to run the UAC such as the UAC hall, UAC office, harvest and
processing kitchen, mothering room, tool room, and a greenhouse.
91
The hall is a 3,435-square foot space that can host events, be an extended
seating area for the teaching kitchen, and/or be a quiet area for students to study in.
The UAC office is located nearby the hall and it controls the paperwork and planning
for the UAC.
The harvesting and processing room is used for a variety of thing for the
UAC. This list includes classes for preserving, prepping, and cleaning food from the
greenhouse it is located adjacent to. As well as a location for the volunteers or
workers to preserve, prep, or clean the food from the greenhouse.
Next to this space is the Mothering Room. It is a space where the public can
come and interact with hens and rabbits with their young. It is to be used for a place
where the public can get exposed to livestock and understand that their food come
from an animal and not a grocery store cooler. This will also teach them the value of
life by showing them how much care goes into taking care of something so small.
The Tool room is where the smaller handheld tools are stored at for the
center. This would also double as a tool library for the public. A tool library is a place
where the public can sign up to rent out various items that they either would not
normally have or could afford. This allows the public to do their own yard work,
gardening, home repairs, and much more.
The Greenhouse attached to the main building spans the entire main building
and has a floor area of 2,788 square feet. The greenhouse is used to teach the
public about aquaponics, hydroponics, greywater reuse, and about growing plants
for food.
92
Second floor.
Image 33. Second Floor – Urban Agriculture Center
The second floor of the UAC is a 3,155-square foot of flexible area that could
be used for events of every occasion. In the case of a city emergency it could even
become a temporary living area due to it being left open and not closed off.
93
Third floor / roof level.
Image 34. Third Floor – Urban Agriculture Center
The third floor of the UAC is an 1,834-square foot lounge. This lounge has a
variety of seating arrangements to cater to different sizes of groups. Along the south
facing wall of this floor is a curtain wall that extends the entire wall. Next to this are
rows of movable shelving carts that have a planter on top of it. These planters would
be used to grow a variety of edible plants and herbs in them. The plants would be
salad greens, strawberries, tomatoes (with cage for it to climb), mint, garlic,
lavender, scallions, and many others. Along with their edible attributes these plants
would provide an aromatic smell to the entire UAG building. These are smaller
plants that would not be used for large production but for the public to interact with
94
while enjoying the space. The greenhouse located on the roof of the CGC would be
used for production.
Rooftop Greenhouse
Image 35. Rooftop Greenhouse – Urban Agriculture Center
The rooftop greenhouse is located on the roof above the recreation center
and commons areas of the building. To access this 5,845-square foot greenhouse
there are two elevators: one that is located inside the greenhouse to bring
vegetables down to the kitchen and the main elevator of the building that brings you
into a lounge area connecting to the greenhouse. Its purpose and functioning differs
widely from the greenhouse on the first floor of the UAC.
The rooftop greenhouse would be used for research and production. This
greenhouse would be split into two sections: one for growing crops for the building
year around and the other side for leasing out to schools and restaurants for their
own use.
95
Harvest Buildings
Image 36. First Floor Harvest Outbuilding – Urban Agriculture Center
There are two harvest outbuildings: a main one located next to the first-floor
greenhouse and the other is located on the north section of the site by the orchard.
The main harvest building is a mixture of a building to take in and process the
produce and animal products and an event space.
There is a large outdoor patio that during harvest season would be the
collection point for the garden. This produce would then be sent inside to be cleaned
and stored in the designated storage areas in the harvest building and in the kitchen
96
in the community center if needed. During the off season, this area would be a
space where the community can have events. The main floor of this building is
where produce would be sorted, cleaned,
and stored. It is also where an office is at
that would be over the outdoor areas of
the UAC. The basement of this building
would be the location for storage of
produce and animal products. It would
also be the location for the composting
toilet system that would be used to
produce compost to be added to a worm
bin and then the compost made by them
would be used in the garden.
Image 37. Livestock Buildings –
Urban Agriculture Center
97
Livestock Buildings
There are 4 buildings for the 4 types of animals that are onsite. There are
dairy goats, rabbits, ducks, and chickens. Each one of these require different types
of spaces and different living situation. On the follow page is a table giving these
details (Carpenter, N., & Rosenthal, W, 2012).
Pasture
Enclo Enclosed Area (sq.
per Exercis Exercise Yard (sq. ft.) Area (sq.
sed Pasture ft.)
e Yard ft.)
Area Area
Animal (SQ
(SQ (SQ FT)
FT) 20 40 60 20 40 60 20 40
FT)
3.
Dairy 1.7 4
100 125 87,120 2,000 4,000 6,000 2,500 5,000 7,500
Cow mil mi
l
8,
Dairy 4,00
25 50 200 500 1,000 1,500 1,000 2,000 3,000 00
Goat 0
0
8,
4,00
Sheep 25 50 200 500 1,000 1,500 1,000 2,000 3,000 00
0
0
60
Ducks 8 15 15 160 320 480 300 600 900 300
0
Chicken 40
4 10 10 80 160 240 200 400 600 200
s 0
40
Rabbits 3 10 10 60 120 180 200 400 600 200
0
24
Beehive 0 0 6 - - - - - - 120
0
Table 27. Livestock Spacing Requirements
98
# Enclosed Exercise Pasture
Type of
of Area (SQ Yard Area Fencing Feed
housing
Animals FT) (SQ FT) (SQ FT)
Enclosed
Electric,
barn with Foraging but
Woven
Dairy removable needs hay. Alfalfa
20 890 3137 6103 wire, or
Goat side is best for them.
livestock
panels or Grass hay works
panels
windows
pelleted or
Enclosed Chicken
Ducks 60 530 N/A 1550 crumble feed and
shed wire
food scraps
Enclosed
shed with Chicken
Chickens 60 530 N/A 1550 Feed and scraps
roosting wire
area
Covered
Feed pellets and
building
Chicken certain snacks
Rabbits 60 680 N/A N/A with
wire depending on
hanging
rabbit
Cages
Beehive 4 6 0 N/A Beehive None Sugar water
Table 28. Livestock Needs
Urban Agriculture Center Conclusion
Fairground Park and the surrounding communities are lacking in access to
fresh food compared to most of the north side of St. Louis City. This could be fixed
through the building of another grocery store in the area. It would be food that would
have to be paid for and would provide minimum wage jobs. This is not ideal though,
it will just be a band aid over a much bigger issue. There needs to be a place where
people can get fresh food, learn how to grow, prepare, and cook food for their self.
The Urban Agriculture Center is such a place. It would provide these things as well
as be place where people can come together at.
99
Chapter 13
Building Area: Makerspace
Introduction to the Makerspace
Before going into details about the makerspace at the CGC in detail the
definition of a makerspace important to go over. There are a few definitions that I
feel give a great general description of what a makerspace is. According to Maker
Media, they are “community centers with tools. Makerspaces combine
manufacturing equipment, community, and education for the purposes of enabling
community members to design, prototype and create manufactured works that
wouldn’t be possible to create with the resources available to individuals working
alone” (Maker Media, n.d.). Laura Fleming of worlds-of-learning.com states “a
makerspace is a metaphor for a unique learning environment that encourages
tinkering, play and open-ended exploration for all” (Fleming, 2017). The overall idea
from the above is that a makerspace is a space that allows the community to gather,
collaborate, and create things together.
This makerspace is the tech and collaboration hub of the community. It is
designed to provide the community with technology, education, collaboration, and
engagement. It provides facilities that for a small fee gives the public access to laser
cutters, cnc machines, 3d printers, powerful workstations, a computer lab,
woodshop, welders, a STEAM classroom, and an open work area. It is located next
to the main entrance to the Community Growth Center on the East end. This chapter
100
will go over the purpose, areas, and the overall focus of the Urban Agriculture
Center.
Purpose of the Makerspace
The Makerspace focuses on several issues that were mentioned in chapter 6.
As well as fulfilling the mission and vision statements of the CGC in chapter 1.
These issues are a lack of trade schools and updated schools, and business
opportunities. These issues all revolve around the idea of providing a place of
education in the trades and giving the public access to technology most people
would not have access to.
Lack of Trade Schools and Updated Schools
The Makerspace is designed to give the public a space to acquire skills that
would allow you to design, prototype, and build about anything that you can carry out
of the door. The need for a large size trade school is still there though. The
Makerspace would be something that fulfills the need for access to high tech
equipment and wood working that is lacking in the area. As for updating schools the
facility would fill in that position. There could be high school classes of varying ages
to give the students the exposure and experience to such equipment and software
that would give them a step up when either going to a trades school or applying to a
college.
101
Lack of Business Opportunities
As mentioned in the last chapter the facility has a variety of equipment that
would give a variety of high tech tools to individuals. This gives the option to the
public to use the facility to build a company by gaining skills and using the facility to
create their items. Along with this there could be existing companies in the area that
are interesting in using the facility to help lower costs and fabricate things of their
own here instead of paying others. All of the different users above would be paying
different fees based on their proposed usage of the facility.
Spaces of the Makerspace and their Function
The Makerspace consists of a total of 10,736-square feet of building space
that is split up between the first floor with 7,254-square feet and the second floor
with 4,775-square feet.
102
First Floor
Image 38. First Floor - Makerspace

103
The first floor of the makerspace area is the main area of activity in the
makerspace. It is where most of the work, collaboration and learning occurs in the
makerspace.
Technology available.
Inside the makerspace there are a variety of technologies available to the public
to learn and create with. There are cnc machines, laser cutters, 3D printers, welders,
and a paint booth. In order to learn how to utilize the cnc, laser cutters, and 3D printers
there is a computer lab where the public can have full access to software to utilize this
technology.
Collaboration area.
To promote the interaction of thought between users of the makerspace a
space dedicated to them was required. The lounge area has a variety of seating
areas that can be moved around to suit the needs of the people there. Collaboration
would occur in more than just the lounge area. The rest of the makerspace would
have this occur as well.
104
Second Floor
Image 39. Second Floor - Makerspace

105
The Second floor of the makerspace area is the area of the makerspace that
does the training for the makerspace and has a lounge. It is where you get trained
to use the software that is on all of the computers in the computer lab on the first
floor. Another key element in this area is the STEAM classroom. It is dedicated to
youth to learn about the physical and social Sciences, incorporation of Technology,
principles of Engineering and design, English language Arts, and application of
Mathematics. This space allows local schools to engage their students in subjects
and technology that is not readily available to them at their school. The school floor
is also the location of another lounge that looks off into the pool area.
Makerspace Area Conclusion
The Makerspace area is the innovation center for the community. It gives the
community a place to grow and learn to build and fix things on their own. The
makerspace is also the shop for the CGC. This allows things to be fabricated and
repaired onsite instead of paying others to fix things unless specialty expertise is
needed. The tools in the makerspace can help with expansion in the future by using
the tools here. Thus, the Makerspace is vital to the future growth of the CGC as well
as the Community.
106
CHAPTER 14
BUILDING AREA: RECREATION AND AQUATICS CENTER
Introduction to the Recreation and Aquatics Center
The Recreation and Aquatic center is the fitness center for the Community
Growth Center. It provides a place for recreation as well as interaction for the
community and for the visitors of the CGC. It is located on the north side of the
community center and is accessed directly through the commons area. This chapter
will go over the purpose, areas, and the overall focus of the Recreation and Aquatics
Center.
Purpose of the Recreation and Aquatics Center
The Recreation and Aquatic Center focuses on two things mentioned in
chapter 6. It focuses on providing a place of recreational activity and promote a
healthy lifestyle for the community and visitors of the CGC.
Recreational Activity
One of the key solutions to having a place for recreation is have a variety of
spaces. By giving a variety of areas for exercising the people coming there is given
choice. Some may want to just be in the weight machine or some want to be working
out in the gymnasium. Another key to promoting people working out is to give them
something to look at while working out. Each workout area except the boxing room
has a view into something. This gives them something to enjoy while working out
instead of bare walls.
107
Healthy Lifestyle
In chapter 6 in mentions that the youth in the area need a proper diet and
access to healthy food. This is something that works directly to having a healthy
lifestyle. Having a place to be active in will help with creating and promoting a
healthy lifestyle in the community. One thing that would help with this would be
having free events for the community that would being in people to try healthy food
and learn about what the Recreation and Aquatics Center offers.
Spaces of the Recreation and Aquatic Center
The entire area consists of a total of 42,000 square feet of building space.
The Recreation Center has a total of 35,899 square footage split between the first
floor being 31,731 square feet and the second floor being 6,552 square feet of floor
space. The Aquatic Center has a total square footage of 6,101. The following
images combines both of each space into one.
108
First Floor
Image 40. First Floor – Recreation and Aquatic Center
109
Second Floor
Image 41. Second Floor – Recreation and Aquatic Center
Recreation and Aquatics Center Conclusion
The Recreation and aquatics Center is the fitness center for the surrounding
community. It would provide them with a space to become active and build a healthy
lifestyle. It is also a place to interact and engage with new people. This type of space
is needed in this area of north side St. Louis City and would make a huge impact.
110
CHAPTER 15
BUILDING AREA: DAYCARE
Introduction to the Daycare
The Daycare is the childcare and after school center for the Community
Growth Center. The Daycare provides childcare of infants to age 5 and has an
afterschool program for ages 6 to 15 for the community and for visitors of the CGC.
It is located at the east end of the community center and connects directly with the
administration area for the community center. This chapter will go over the purpose,
areas, and the overall focus of the daycare.
Purpose of the Daycare
The daycare, unlike the other spaces in the community Center, focuses on
three things that are not mentioned in chapter 6. It focuses on providing nature-
based childcare for the visitors of the community center and the community, as well
as an afterschool program for the community. These three focuses enable greater
access to the entire facility.
CGC Visitors Childcare
The community center consists of areas that a parent would like to use but
having a young child prevents them from using the facilities. This is where the
daycare comes in at. The daycare gives parents a place to drop their child or
children off while they utilize the facility. This keeps access to the facility open to
everyone. Such that if a single parent wants to come here and do something in one
111
of the areas of the building they can drop off their child at the daycare. Then when
they are done they can come pick up their child. This would also include parents that
need childcare to go to work.
Community Childcare Needs
The daycare would also be used as a daily childhood center. From my direct
observation of driving around the area there are few daycares that have outdoor play
areas. This daycare would provide daycare for the parents in the area to allow them
to drop off their children and let them work.
The Afterschool Program
The afterschool program gives the youth in the area a place of learning after
school and during the summer. The afterschool program would utilize the rest of the
building to give programs throughout the year for the youth involved in the program.
It is located at the southern end of the Daycare and has its own lounge, computer
lab, and multimedia room.
112
Spaces of the Daycare and their Functions
The Daycare Center has a square footage of 8,934 that contains 4 areas in
which are split up between 5 age groups: infant, toddler, preschool, and afterschool.
First Floor
Image 42. First Floor Section 1 – Daycare and Afterschool Area
113
Image 43. First Floor Section 2 – Daycare and Afterschool Area
Daycare Conclusion
The daycare is a space in the CGC and the community that gives the parents
a place to feel safe about their children being in a learning environment. As well as
give the parents the freedom to go to work or use the CGC. It also gives the children
of the community by providing a safe and healthy place of learning throughout the
year and for all age groups. All of this gives the community a way to improve the
quality of life to everyone here.
114
Chapter 16
Building Area: Administration
Introduction to the Administration
The Administration Area is the business end of the rest of the Community
Growth Center. The Administration Area provides management, event scheduling,
and finances for the rest of the CGC. It is located at the east end of the building and
is next to the daycare. This chapter will go over the purposes, areas, and the core
focus of the Administration Area.
Purpose of the Administration Area
The Administration Area purpose is to oversee the operations of the entire
CGC. It focuses on the providing the CGC with office space, event scheduling,
financial development, and a space for administrative duties. These four focuses
enable the CGC to continue operation far into the future and build connections with
the community.
Office Space
The Administration Area is the location of the office areas for the Daycare,
Makerspace, Finances, Event Coordinator, and the Center Director. Each of these
have their own office in this area for their head person. There is also an additional
office and workstation that can be used when needed. Due to the distance from this
office area and their unique needs the Urban Agriculture Center and the Recreation
and Aquatic Center has an office in their areas.
Event Scheduling
115
The CGC is a massive building that would have a variety of events happening
throughout it. To leave scheduling of the events that happen throughout the center to
each area would cause issues. To help keep the areas running smoothly a position
dedicated to schedule the events throughout the space is needed. This position
would also oversee the events that are run outside of the CGC but are still promoted
by the CGC.
Financial Development
To keep the CGC financially viable there is a Financial office. This position is
needed to run the entire facility. It will assist in fundraising, running finance classes,
and keep payroll for the entire CGC. This position will allow for the CGC to grow and
give the community financial advice to help give them the tools to have a better life.
Spaces for Administrative Duties
As mentioned before the Urban Agriculture Center and the Recreation and
Aquatic Center has their own offices. These offices will be used for the everyday
workings of these areas. The main administration area is the location of the copy
and break room. As well as the conference rooms for CGC official business. This
reduces the expenses of having multiple office supplies in the building.
116
Spaces of the Administration Area
The Administration area has a
square footage of 3,724.
Administration Area Conclusion
The administration area is the
center of business for the CGC. It is
where the business side of every area of
the CGC is developed and grown at. This
is vital to the continuing growth of the
CGC and the surrounding community by
taking this growth and funneling it back
into the development and evolution of the
CGC. Thus increasing the impact of the
CGC in the surrounding community and
beyond.
Image 44. First Floor - Administration
117
Chapter 17
Building Design
Introduction to the Building Design
This chapter is dedicated to the building design of the Community Growth
Center. Throughout this chapter will be site plans, floor plans, elevations, and
perspectives of the CGC not shown in the other chapters. Many of these images are
large and will take up the entire page.
Image 45. CGC Ortho with CGC Logo
118
Site Plan
Image 46. CGC Site Plan
119
Building Area Plan
Image 47. Building Area Plan
120
First Floor Plan
Image 48. Entire Building First Floor Plan
121
Second Floor Plan
Image 49. Entire Building Second Floor Plan
122
Elevations
Image 50. East Elevation
Image 51. West Elevation
Image 52. North Elevation
Image 53. South Elevation
123
Perspectives
Image 54. Front Entrance View
Image 55. Daycare/Admin Rooftop View
124
Image 56. Garden/Urban Ag Center View
Image 57. Urban Ag Center/Gymnasium View
125
CHAPTER 18
PROJECT SITE ANALYSIS AND CONSIDERATIONS
Location of Site in St. Louis
Image 58. St. Louis, Missouri and Fairground Park
N. Grand Blvd.
Natural Bridge Ave.
Image 59. Fairground Park with Site

126
Site Analysis Introduction
This chapter shows the deciding factors in choosing the exact location in
Fairground Park. Fairground Park was chosen as the area of interest through the
research covered in chapter 3, 4, 5, and 6. This information can be found in those
chapters. The information in this chapter will go over the Fairground Park analysis,
site selection, site weather analysis, existing conditions, and site development.
Fairground Park Analysis
This area of the park is the only section that is clear enough of trees that little
to no trees would be disturbed on the site. This was vital in site selection because
many of the trees in the park are older and established. Taking these down just to
build a building would be against the vision statement of the project. Thus, this site
was one of the only areas of the park that would be large enough to place the
building on and not displace many trees. This location is also ideal because it is
adjacent to N. Grand Blvd and parallel to Natural Bridge Ave.
127
Image 60. Fairground Park Area
Image 61. Fairground Park Area – Roads
128
Image 62. Fairground Park Area - Figure
Image 63. Fairground Park Area – Vacant Lots
129
Image 64. Fairground Park Area - Zoning
Image 65. Fairground Park Area – Metro Bus Routes
130
Image 66. Fairground Park Area – Amenities
Image 67. Fairground Park Area – Building Form Influence 1

131
132
Image 70. Fairground Park Area – Climate Analysis
Prominent Streets and Transit
Grand Blvd is a north and south running 5-lane street that starts at the south
side of St. Louis at Carondelet Park, next to Tower Grove Park, through St. Louis
University, next to Fairground Park, and it ends in the industrial area next to
Merchants bridge that connects railroad traffic of Missouri and Illinois. This length of
street is also a route for the public transit Metro bus that runs the entire path
described above. Due to its expansive reach, this street is vital for the public to
access this park. Natural Bridge Ave. links the city to this area in another way.
Natural Bridge Ave. is an east and west running 6-lane street that starts at N
Florissant Ave. This is where Natural Bridge Ave. differs from Grand Blvd. Due to its
133
size and east and west direction Natural Bridge Avenue it is used to hold large
amounts of traffic that comes from the North and South directional streets that
connect with it. Along with Grand Blvd there are seven other 4 or 5 lane streets that
connects to Natural Bridge Avenue. This is important because of two things.
There is a metro bus route that runs from the downtown area of St. Louis, up
through Florissant Ave., connecting to Natural Bridge Avenue and follows it up to the
Metro Station in North Hanley. This Metro Station connects the metro bus routes of
the area to the Lamberts Airport Terminals. These roads are the lifeline to the long-
term success of this area and it gives direct access to Fairground Park through
public transit and private transportation.
Site Weather Analysis
The exact location of the Community Center is on the southeast end of
Fairground Park in St Louis, Missouri. It is in the northeast area of St. Louis,
Missouri. The site is in a Mixed-Humid climate which is “defined as a region that
receives more than 20 inches (50cm) of annual precipitation, has approximately
5,400 heating degree days (65° F basis) or fewer, and where the average monthly
outdoor temperature drops below 45°F (7°C) during the winter months”.1 This is
great for an average description for this climate but to better understand an area the
exact weather conditions helps to give a detailed idea of the conditions of a region.
134
Image 71. Average Seasonal Precipitation & Average Temperature Ranges (F)
Image 72. Highest and Lowest Sun Angles in the Area
135
Fall Winds Winter Winds
Spring Winds Summer Winds
Image 73. Wind Roses: Directions of the Wind during each Season
136
Image 74. Annual Wind Speed Frequency Distribution
Image 75. Site Solar Diagram
137
Image 76. Monthly Average Dry Bulb Temp
The weather of this area provides a variety of opportunities to the building
design and mechanical system. During the summer time, the sun is higher in the sky
which reduces the amount of sun coming into the building. Even the 2-story curtain
wall in the commons area will not get overheated. This is due to the sun being at the
highest point in the sky is 72 degrees during the summer. With this being the
summer, the use of plants can be used to shade the taller windows on the south
facing wall. During the winter time, these plants will lose their eaves to allow for the
138
sun to come into the building heating it up. The winds of this area vary so much that
there would need to be a different approach to the winds of each season. Even with
these details about the weather the existing site is even more important.
Existing Site Conditions
Image 77. Existing Site Conditions
The above image is the existing site of the community center. This site rather
flat in most aspects. The site from the elevation of the street that is on the north
barrier of it only rises to a height of 7 feet on the south and north-west corner of the
139
site. Even though choosing this site mean getting rid of two of the ball parks there
are many more in the park to utilize. In chapter 22 I cover a Master plan of
Fairground park where I redesign the park so that there are ample parking, pavilions,
and recreation areas for the visitors to enjoy. This chapter is on page 172. Now
looking at the site there is only one tree that may be taken down due to the building
and the site. This is the tree on the northeast side of the site. Thankfully this tree is
not a large established tree. On a positive note, the site will have plenty of trees to
recover any tree that would be taken down due to construction.
140
Developed Site Characteristics
Image 78. Site Plan Landscaped
141
Landscaping Concept: Edible Landscape & Native Plants
The public park in the United States is commonly known as a place where the
public comes to relax, exercise, to see entertainment, play sports, experience nature
and have social gatherings. This seems like an extensive list but the potential that is
dormant physically in a park is extremely large. These parks have soil that are
usually safe to grow in. This soil is physically where the potential lies in. These parks
are usually landscaped with vegetation that are does not produce food for humans.
They are usually a reflection of our manicured lawns that are void of any variety of
plant life. This potential is neglected and then wasted on a yard or park that gives no
food to anyone except for a few animals. Its potential should be used to benefit the
public.
An edible landscape would allow this potential to be tapped into. It is using
plants on a site that give food and/or other benefits to humans, plants, and animals.
This vegetation varies in a variety of function that they perform on a site.
Pollinating plants.
There are pollinating plants that allow fruit producing plants to reproduce and
give butterflies, bees, and hummingbirds needed benefits. There are fruit bearing
plants that gives us and animals food to eat. There is also vegetation that gives
indirect benefits to everything on the site. For example: large trees drop leaves for
composting, shade, and habitation for its location. The evergreen trees give shelter
for animals and blocks winds all year around. This variety of plants work together to
provide a site that is productive and gives food freely in comparison to a traditional
142
landscaping in a park. To ensure that the edible landscape survives long-term and
require less maintenance the use of native plants is vital.
Native plants.
Native plants are plants that are indigenous to an area. These plants
establish their self easily and require no watering. Many of these fits the above types
of plants. Such as: paw paw, hardy pecan, black walnut, flowering dogwood,
American Holly, Big Bluestem, black berry, and butterfly milkweed.
The pawpaw tree is a deciduous tree that reaches maturity between 15 and
20-foot-tall and it favors the sun and wet soil. It produces small yellow fruit that are
edible to humans and animals alike. It is ideal to plant along ponds and streams with
plenty of sun (Gardens, M. B., n.d.).
The hardy pecan tree is a deciduous tree that reaches maturity between 75
and 100-foot-tall and it favors full sun and medium water content in the soil. It
produces fruit that are encased in a shell and loved by humans and animals alike.
One great thing about this tree is that it tolerates the black walnut tree that only a
select variety of plants can exist around. It is ideal to plant around black walnut trees
and in areas that you would like shade at (Gardens, M. B., n.d.).
The black walnut tree is a deciduous tree that reaches maturity between 75
and 100-foot-tall and it favors full sun and medium water content in the soil. It
produces nuts in hard shells that are edible and loved by humans and animals alike.
Due to these trees large stature at maturity long term plan is needed to prevent from
having to cut it down in the future. Another thing that needs to be planned for is that
143
its roots produces chemicals in the soil called juglones. These chemicals are toxic to
a variety of plants thus requiring planning of what is planted under and around the
area of the tree. The hardy pecan and dog wood tree are some trees that can
tolerate its roots. The black walnut tree is ideal in areas that you would like a lot of
shade and plan to have no buildings under due to the tree dropping its fruit in the
future (Gardens, M. B., n.d.).
The flowering dogwood tree is a deciduous tree that reaches maturity
between 15 and 30 feet tall and it favors full sun to part shade and medium water
content in the soil. It produces white flowers from April to May and have tiny red fruit
that are only edible by birds. Due to it flowering nature it attracts butterflies as well.
Like the Hardy pecan the flowering dogwood is also tolerate of the chemicals that
the black walnut trees roots produce. This tree is ideal in areas under black walnuts
and around areas that where you want to attract bird and butterflies such as a prairie
area (Gardens, M. B., n.d.).
The American Holly is an evergreen tree that reaches maturity between 15
and 30 feet tall and it favors full sun to part shade and medium water content in the
soil. It produces red berries all year around that edible by birds and the foliage can
be used in winter wreaths. This tree is great to have in areas that you would like to
have year around foliage (Foundation, M. P., n.d.).
Project Site Conclusion
The chosen site in the Fairground Park was dictated by the impact that it
would have in the park and the amount of open space free of trees that it offers. This
was combined with its proximity with the bus routes and the nearby high school at
144
the southeast end of the park. The landscaping done on the was geared to provide
both humans and wildlife food. This also gives a deterrent to the wildlife to eat the
vegetables out of the garden and promote them to eat the food on the trees
surrounding the site. This and many other things make this site ideal for the CGC.
145
CHAPTER 19
PROJECT SYSTEMS AND SUSTAINABILITY FEATURES
Introduction
When it comes to the CGC the systems and sustainable technologies of the
building are one in the same. The technologies decided upon were picked to reduce
the amount of energy that entire building would be using over its lifetime. They were
also chosen to create a comfortable environment for the occupants of the CGC.
These systems can be broken down into Water, Energy, HVAC, and Food
Production.
Water Systems
The water systems for the CGC was geared toward reducing initial water
usage through fixtures, rainwater reuse, and greywater filtration and reuse. These
three methods allowed for reduction in indoor water use by 73.2% and a reduction of
storm water runoff by 29%. The indoor greywater from the building will be stored in
the building, filtered through plant beds, and then used to irrigate the garden,
orchard, and the landscaping on the site. When it comes to the rainwater it will be
stored along with the greywater to dilute it and reduce the pressure on the filtering
plant beds. The following figures show the details of this information.
146
Indoor water Reduction
The indoor water reduction calculation was calculated by utilizing the LEED
v4 Indoor Water Use Reduction Calculator that is used to gain the WE Prerequisite
and the credits for indoor water use reduction. The following is the results with a
baseline of standard use plumbing fixtures (U.S. Green Building Council, 2017).
Baseline Case Design Case

(gallons/year) (gallons/year)
Annual Annual Annual Annual
Annual Annual
Flush Flow Flush Flow
Consumption Consumption
Volume Volume Volume Volume
671864.4 282502.8 954,367.2 0 255772.8 255,772.8
Annual baseline water consumption (gallons/year) 954,367.2

Annual design water consumption (gallons/year) 255,772.8
Percent water use reduction (%) 73%
Table 29. v4 Indoor Water Use Reduction Calculator Summary for D+C
Baseline Fixtures Design Fixtures

Flow Flow
Count Fixture Type Count Fixture Type
(GPF) (GPF)
Composting
Dual Flush Low Flow Toilets 1.6 32 0
32 Toilets
Waterless
Urinals 1 3 0
3 Urinals
31 Low Flow Faucet 0.5 31 Low Flow Faucet 0.5
12 Shower Heads 2.5 12 High Comp 1.25
12 Kitchen Faucets 2.2 13 Kitchen Faucets 2.2
Table 30. Condensed Version of Fixtures Comparison for Indoor Water Use
Stormwater Runoff Reduction
147
The storm water runoff reduction calculation was done using the US EPA
National Stormwater Calculator. The following are the results from it (U.S. EPA,
2017).
Table 31. National Stormwater Calculator Report: Summary Results
Image 79. Baseline and Current Scenario of Runoff, Infiltration, and Evaporation
148
Table 32. Stormwater Calculator Report
149
Greywater Filtration System.
According to the LEED v4 Indoor Water Use Reduction Calculator on page
148 there is a total of 255,772.8 gallons per year of greywater produced by the entire
building. This water must be pretreated before being used in irrigation due to the
high salt and phosphorus content in it. These are present due to cleaning agents
used in all types of cleaning. This can be minimized by requiring that all cleaning
solutions fit this profile and even providing these types of soaps to the visitors using
the showers. The process of this filtration system is as follows.
1. Water from the sinks, urinals, dishwasher, and mostly showers is sent to the storage in
the mechanical space in the basement. This also includes the rainwater from the roof.
2. The use of Phytoremediation; using living green plants to remove contaminants in soils,
sludges, sediments, surface water and groundwater; is used to clean the greywater
(United Nations Environment Program, 2017).
3. This is done by sending the water through a set of constructed wetland staged beds.
These contain two types of plants, Floralta Limp grass and Aleman grass, that are
proven to filter out various toxin including phosphorus from dairy wastewaters (Debusk,
T. A., Peterson, J. E., & Reddy, K. R., 1995).
4. These multiple filtration beds would be set in tandem with storage tanks at the start and
the end. The raw greywater coming into the first tank would be oxygenated to force
oxygen into the water. The water would pump down the tanks with the tank is full.
5. At the very end of this chain of filtration beds is another holding tank that pumps the
filtered water out to the main holding tank in the garden and the one out by the orchard.
150
6. The holding tank in the garden and the orchard the pumps the filtered water to the
upper heights of the area. This water then uses gravity to water the garden and
orchard.
The system above would take waste water that is usually sent into the sewer
system and used beneficially onsite to provide sustenance for the community.
Energy Production Systems
The energy production system of the CGC is a very vital part to the long-term
financial viability of it. As well as reducing reliance on fossil fuels. This system
consists of direct and indirect parts. The direct system is the part of it that produces
electricity. The indirect system is the part that reduces energy consumption.
Direct Energy Production Systems
The direct energy production system of the CGC is compiled of a scattered
solar panel array system and a small set of wind generators. With these two sets of
systems they produce 30% of the yearly energy of the
Solar panel array system.
The solar panel array system consists of 668, 60 monocrystalline solar cells,
solar panel modules that would produce an estimated total of 384,733 kWh in a
year. In the calculations that were done using the LSX 280 model solar panel by
Lumos was used (Lumos, n. d.). The following calculations were done on the
151
Department of Energy’s System Advisor Model (SAM) Software (System Advisor
Model Version 2016.3.14).
Image 80. SAM Photovoltaic System Report
152
Small form wind generators system.
The small form wind generators system consists of 12 small form wind
generators that would produce an estimated 78,546 kWh per year. This is 7% of the
total energy needs of the entire building. This result is very small and is not that
viable when the cost for the wind generator systems could be used to spend more
money into the solar wind farm or other energy reducing system in the building. The
following calculations were done on the Department of Energy’s System Advisor
Model (SAM) Software (System Advisor Model Version 2016.3.14).
Image 81. SAM Wind Generator System Report
153
indirect Energy Production Systems
An indirect Energy Productions system is a system that replaces a traditional
system to reduce the energy used. The indirect system used in the CGC are: Solar
water heaters and the mechanically assisted ventilation system.
Solar water heater systems.
The solar water heater system consists of 18 solar hot water heaters. These
solar water heaters would be used to heat the water for the entire building. It would
be paired with an electric hot water heater in case the temperatures are not ideal.
This system is part of the HVAC system that will be mentioned later in this chapter.
The following calculations were done on the Department of Energy’s System Advisor
Model (SAM) Software (System Advisor Model Version 2016.3.14).
Image 82. SAM Wind Generator System Report
154
Ventilation system.
The ventilation system is designed to use no ducts to vent the building. This
was decided in conjunction with the decision to use hydronic floor heating
throughout the facility. By eliminating the use ducts throughout the building, you
reduce maintenance on cleaning the duct systems over the entire lifetime of the
building. You also reduce the cost of installing the ducts and the allergens connected
with having duct systems. This requires a ventilation system that works together but
is separate from each other. This system would utilize two types of ventilation:
natural ventilation and mechanically assisted ventilation.
Natural ventilation.
Throughout the building there are areas that either have exterior wall vents
and / or upper story windows. The system uses the natural flow of heat upwards to
bring the air from the outside into the building while pushing the stale air out of the
building. The Commons area is one such place in the building.
155
Image 83. Commons Area Natural Ventilation Example
The commons area is the central core of the building that is open to the
second and roof level of the building with walkways going across the open areas on
the second level. On the roof level, it is open to walkway with planters going across
it. This walkway is where you access the rooftop greenhouse from. The air from the
south facing curtain wall comes into the building through the windows and is pulled
up through vents inside of the greenhouse. This allows for an exchange of air and
heat between the interior and exterior of the building.
Mechanically assisted ventilation.
Another method of ventilation is using units to bring in and condition fresh air
from the exterior of the building into the interior of the building. This can be done
through vents located on the exterior of the façade that allows air to naturally flow in.
These vents can be paired with the natural ventilation system to promote flow of air
156
without any motors. There are also units that be attached to the curtainwall façade to
bring in the air from the exterior of the building.
Image 84. Typical Curtain Wall Attached Ventilation Unit Example 1
The above unit is my own design. This unit can be attached to the exterior of
the build to a vent on the exterior of a building or attached to a curtain wall above a
entrance door. This unit could easily be created in the Makerspace in the CGC.
Ventilation unit design layout.
This unit is very simple in how it operates. The fresh air comes in through a
vent that has mesh to prevent bugs from entering the building and louvres to keep
157
out rain. The next part of it has fins that send the air upwards to mix around the
conditioning coil.
This coil is directly connected to the hydronic floor system so that the
temperature needed in the building is directly connected to the fresh air being
conditioned in the unit. This coil would not need any pumps due to the hydronic floor
system would treat the unit like the floor in that area of the building.
The cooled or heated air would then be blown through the rest of the unit
through a filter located at the exit of the unit. This unit would allow for a low
maintenance and low-cost method to bringing fresh air into the building. While at the
same time producing something that could be built and sold.
Image 85. Typical Curtain Wall Attached Ventilation Unit Example 2
158
HVAC System
This part of the chapter is dedicated to the heating and cooling system of the
CGC. Some of the previous parts of this chapter goes over some of the parts of this
system and will still be mentioned as a entire system that works together as a whole.
The system was developed from a system that is designed by ClimateMaster Inc.
(2011). The following two images on the next two pages are used to show the
system example and the developed system created for the buildings.
159
160
Image 86. ClimateMaster Inc. Example Geothermal System
161
Image 87. CGC Designed Geothermal System
Food Production System
The food production occurring on the site at CGC varies. It consists of a
14,859 square feet or .341 acre of garden beds, 85 4 foot by 12 foot raised beds,
two greenhouses (5,845 square foot rooftop greenhouse and a 2,789 square foot
ground level greenhouse), an orchard with 50 apple trees, 15 apricot trees, and 20
paw paw trees; and there are livestock on site. The maximum capacity for livestock
are as followed: 20 goats, 60 rabbits, 60 ducks, and 60 chickens. Much of this
information can be found inside in Chapter 12 that goes over the Urban Agriculture
Center.
Systems and Sustainability Conclusion
The CGC is a very complex building that requires much more time to
developed every detail of how it would operate. Thus, some of this areas are not as
developed or fully through as would be done in the profession. It does give a depth
into how complex this expansive building would be due to its system working
together as one unit to reduce energy use and be less of a burden on the planet.
162
CHAPTER 20
CGC OPERATIONS
Introduction to the Operations of the CGC
This chapter is dedicated to the understanding and estimation of the
workforce needed to run the CGC. Due to the buildings sheer size and varying areas
there will be a variety of managerial positions to oversee each area. The rest of this
chapter goes over the types of employment opportunities in the building, the staffing
of each are in the building, and the hourly operations of each area.
Types of Employment Opportunities
The CGC has the typical types of employment: full time, part time,
contract, and volunteer positions. The only thing that is different from these
traditional positions is that the CGC has a barter system.
The Barter system is designed to create equal access to everyone in
the community to the CGC. For example: if someone wants to use the Makerspace
or take classes at the CGC they can trade time working at the CGC in exchange for
work credit to be used in the CGC. This allows lower income and homeless to have
open access to the resources available in the facility. This will give the center a
workforce to operate the CGC and give equal opportunity to the facility to everyone.
This is all ran by the main CGC building staff.
163
Area Staffing
Throughout the areas of the CGC there are staffing that are needed to run the
entire facility. Now the staffing plan that was developed for the facility is just an
estimate for the needed staff to operate the facility.
Area Position Type # Notes

Checks in CGC users and
Front Desk Full Time 3
answers their questions.
Public face and advocate for
Center Director Full Time 1
the CGC.
For each area (minus UAC &
Area Executives Full Time 5
Rec).
Manages payroll, fundraising,
Financial Officer Full Time 1
Main CGC and investments.
Building Manages all events hosted in
Event Coordinator Full Time 1
and out of CGC.
Part Time / Assist with administrative
Assistants 3
Volunteer duties.
Cleaning, Repairs, &
Maintenance Full Time 1
Maintenance.
Cleaning, Repairs, &
Maintenance Barter 4
Maintenance.
Front desk covers & buzzer for
Daycare Desk N/A 0
daycare
Cover all areas minus
Daycare Teachers Full Time 7
Daycare afterschool.
Covers Afterschool classroom
Afterschool Teachers Full Time 2
activities.
Afterschool Assistant Full Time 2 Covers Afterschool area.
Manages shop
Shop Manager Full Time 1
activities and operations.
Part Time / Assist users in equipment
Tech Assistants 4
Makerspace Volunteer operations.
Computer Training Trains users in operation of
Full Time 1
Teacher software.
Table 33. Area Staffing
164
Area Position Type # Notes
Aquatics Life Guards Part Time 8 Ensures the safety of swimmers.
Rec and
Aquatics Full Time 1 Manages Rec. and Aquatics area.
Manager
Recreation Personal Hosts personal health classes
Center Part Time 2
Trainers and fitness plan creations
Group Workout Runs workout sessions on a
Contract 2
Leaders contract basis.
Kitchen Manages and runs the Teaching
Full Time 1
Manager Kitchen.
Teaching
Part Time/
Kitchen Teaches a variety of cooking
Training Chefs Contract / 4
courses.
Barter
Urban Ag. Manages and runs the Urban
Full Time 1
Manager Agriculture Center.
Greenhouse Manages and runs both
Full Time 1
Manager greenhouses.
Urban Ag.
Site
Center Runs the lawn work and the
Maintenance Full Time 1
harvesting of the entire site.
Worker
Volunteer / 15- Varies based on needs based
Harvesting Staff
Barter 30 and harvest time.
Table 33. Area Staffing (Cont.)
Due to the above table being an estimate of the staff needed for the facility
there needed to be room to compensate for the estimate. This compensation
includes providing extra office space in the administration area and more than
enough space to expand on the first and second floor of the building. Other than the
extra office in the administration area the other areas throughout the CGC is used as
multiuse spaces, conference rooms, or classrooms.
165
Conclusion of Operations
The CGC is a massive building with a varying set of spaces inside of it.
This leads to a building that requires a large workforce to keep it operational.
Included with this workforce is a reliance on a barter system to give the lower
income and homeless an opportunity to trade time for access to the entire facility. It
is one of the many things that supports the mission statement of the CGC. The
operations of this facility is what makes it profitable, impactful, and most importantly
be a place for growth in the community.
166
CHAPTER 21
FUNDING POSSIBILITIES
Introduction
The CGC thesis is of such magnitude that it would require a large amount of
funds to construct, furnish, and operate for its long lifespan. Due to this being a
project built on publicly owned land it would be partially funded by the city. As such
the improvements to the park on the site would use this funding. The rest of this
chapter goes over the possible grants that could be used and funding from nearby
universities.
Possible Grants
There are a few grants and programs that fit with the goals of the CGC. The
following information gives a brief description of each one.
Feed Nourish Thrive
This campaign website has a wealth of information about connecting youth
with of today with food and agriculture. Its mission is to “Feed, Nourish, Thrive, this
website and portal to online educational resources, is a campaign aiming to raise
awareness regarding the dire need for more young people to enter careers in food
and agriculture.” This website also gives access to companies and school that
promote the growth of agriculture in society (Feed Nourish Thrive,2017).
167
Monsanto L.E.A.D. Initiative
This campaign led by Monsanto is to develop Leaders Engaged in Advanced
Dialog Initiative (L.E.A.D). This initiative could be used to build up the research in
agriculture done at the CGC (Monsanto, 2017).
USDA Grants and Opportunities
This resource connects you with a variety of grant programs that allow you to
apply for grants that could be used to support and grow the efforts at the CGC
(USDA, 2017).
Arch Grants
Arch Grants provides $50,000 equity-free grants and pro bono support
services to entrepreneurs who locate their early stage businesses in St. Louis. They
are idea for the beginning start of the CGC to kickstart the centers efforts (Arch
Grants, 2016).
100 Black Men of Metropolitan St. Louis
This non-profit would be invaluable for the start of the CGC but also for the
ongoing future of it. Their main goal “is to identify youth who are going to have a
turbulent transition to adulthood and offer a positive support system to avoid the
pitfalls that can derail their lives” (Greater St. Louis Community Foundation, 2017).
168
Nearby Universities
The St. Louis metropolitan area is home to many top universities. These
universities would be ideal to gain support and funding to get the CGC built. They
could use this center for some of their research and could even run classes out of
here for the community. Some of the universities are Washington University in St.
Louis, Saint Louis University, University of Missouri – St. Louis, Webster University,
St. Louis Community College, Maryville University, Missouri Baptist University,
Fontbonne University, Harris-Stowe State University, Ranken Technical College,
and many others. These universities would be invaluable to the continuing
development and growth of the CGC.
Conclusion
The funding for the construction and continuing operation of the CGC would
have to come from a variety of sources. The end goal of the CGC would be to be
self-sufficient in the financial sector. I feel that with the full utilization of every area in
the CGC that it would be financially self-sufficient.
169
CHAPTER 22
FAIRGROUND PARK REDESIGN
Introduction
The Fairground Park is the location of the CGC and as told in chapter 4 has
been a center of activity since it was a fairground as early as 1822. Fast forward to
2017 and that is far from the truth. The park is in desperate need of a redesign and
since the CGC site is located in it this is an ideal situation to integrate the two
together. The following images are the current conditions and the redesign. For
reference the end of this chapter will contain a table showing the changes that
occurred in the park.
Image 88. Modern Day Fairground Park
170
Image 89. Modern Day Fairground Park – Features
Image 90. Redesign – Features Kept
171
Image 91. Redesign – Added Parking and New Fields
Image 92. Redesign – Urban Farm Lots
172
Image 93. Redesign – Added Pavilions
Image 94. Redesign – Bear Pit Fairground Park Museum
173
Image 95. Redevelopment Plan
Existing # Redesign #
Roller Skating Rink 1 Roller Skating Rink 1
Softball Field 5 Softball Field 3
Baseball Fields 4 Baseball Fields 2
Soccer Field 1 Soccer Field 1
Football Field 1 Football Field 1
Basketball Court 3 Basketball Court 6
Softball Field 5 Softball Field 3
Tennis Court 8 Tennis Court 8
Youth Field 1 Youth Field 2
Pavilions 0 Pavilions 21
6 acre CSA Farm 1
Table 34. Fairground Park Redesign Facilities Count
174
Redesign Highlights
The Fairground Park needed some improvements due to the lack of
development over the years. There are two focuses for the improvements in the
park: facility consolidation and productive park.
Facility Consolidation
The existing park looks as if someone placed the sports field wherever they
wanted to without thought to access or sharing facilities. One of the largest things
that was done in the redesign is the consolidation of the softball fields in the lower
area and the combination of the baseball fields in upper area. These were combined
together so that you can add parking and a concession stand to be used by all of
those fields.
Productive Park
The main issue in this area is low access to fresh food so why not use a
public park to produce food for the community. So an 6 acre CSA farm, orchards,
and nut trees were added to the site.
Conclusion
This redesign was not part of the original idea of this thesis but it seemed
natural due to the nature of the CGC. This redesign was developed as a what could
be possible and not exact or to scale. It was created to start a conversation about
developing this park into something new for the future of the community.
175
CHAPTER 23
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
In this concluding chapter, we will be summarizing the CGC thesis, the
conclusion, and the recommendations for future development.
Summary
This thesis was about creating a space that would solve a variety of issues
plaguing an area of the north side of St. Louis city called Fairground Park. This
solution developed into a community center called the Community Growth Center
that contains 7 areas that address specific issues in the community. These areas
would in turn work together to build up the community and its people.
Conclusion
This thesis was developed from research into current conditions and the
history of the surrounding areas of the site. As well as research into farming and
technology needed to operate the facility. It developed individually into areas of the
building that could work on their own. Then when they were combined they created
what the CGC represents. It
Recommendations
I feel that the CGC would be a great solution to addressing the issues in this
area. Of course, this area needs a bigger effort of development to help create a
thriving community here. There needs to be more commercial and residential
development, possible redesign of areas of commerce, and an investment into
176
public works due to the poor conditions of the streets.
The above solutions and the CGC is something that I feel would revive the
community. I personally want to start a discussion with the alderman in the areas
around the park to see what they think about this type of development being done in
the park. To hopefully kickstart a discussion into getting the CGC built in this area of
St. Louis City.
177
REFERENCES
American Community Survey. (2016, November 21). 2015 Narrative Profiles.

Retrieved September 14, 2017, from
https://www.census.gov/acs/www/data/data-tables-and-tools/narrative-
profiles/2015/
This website provides population and housing narrative profiles of communities
around the United States.
Arch Grants. (2016). Elevator Pitch – Arch Grants. Retrieved November 30, 2017,
from https://archgrants.org/about/
Boudreau, K. (2014, April 21). Fairground Park: What History Remains. Retrieved
September 11, 2017, from https://nextstl.com/2010/11/fairground-park-what-
history-remains/
Cambridge University Press. (n.d.). Definition of "community centre" - English
Dictionary. Retrieved September 19, 2017, from
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/community-
centre?q=community+center
Carpenter, N., & Rosenthal, W. (2012). The Essential Urban Farmer. New York:
Penguin Books.
City of Los Angeles. (2001). Chapter 3 - Land Use: Community Centers. Retrieved
September 19, 2017, from
http://cityplanning.lacity.org/cwd/framwk/chapters/03/03204.htm
ClimateMaster Inc. (2011, February 7). ESSENTIALS OF HYDRONICS FOR GSHP
PROFESSIONALS [ Essentials of Hydronics for GSHP Professionals course
manual. ]. Http://climatemaster.com/downloads/RP878.pdf, Oklahoma, OK.
Debusk, T. A., Peterson, J. E., & Reddy, K. R. (1995). Use of aquatic and terrestrial
plants for removing phosphorus from dairy wastewaters. Ecological Engineering,
5(2-3), 371-390. doi:10.1016/0925-8574(95)00033-x
178
Ecology Center. (n.d.). Ecology Center. Retrieved September 19, 2017, from
https://ecologycenter.org/
Feed Nourish Thrive. (2017). Feed Nourish Thrive. Retrieved November 30, 2017,
from https://www.feednourishthrive.com/
Fleming, L. (2017, January 10). What Constitutes MAKING? Retrieved October 01,
2017, from http://worlds-of-learning.com/2016/10/26/what-constitutes-making/
Foundation, M. P. (n.d.). American Holly » Grow Native! Retrieved August 29, 2017,
from http://grownative.org/plant-picker/plant/american-holly/
Gardens, M. B. (n.d.). Black Walnut Tree. Retrieved August 29, 2017, from
http://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/PlantFinder/PlantFinderDetails.aspx?ke
mpercode=a875
Gardens, M. B. (n.d.). Flowering Dogwood Tree. Retrieved August 29, 2017, from
mpercode=c280
Gardens, M. B. (n.d.). Hardy Pecan Tree. Retrieved August 29, 2017, from
mpercode=a852
Gardens, M. B. (n.d.). Paw Paw Tree. Retrieved August 29, 2017, from
mpercode=b500
Gordon, C. (n.d.). Mapping Decline: St. Louis and the Fate of the American City.
Retrieved September 12, 2017, from
http://mappingdecline.lib.uiowa.edu/documents/
Greater St. Louis Community Foundation. (2017). 100 Black Men of Metropolitan St.
Louis. Retrieved November 30, 2017, from
http://www.yourgivinglink.org/charity/view/id/184
History of The Gateway Arch. (n.d.). Retrieved September 09, 2017, from
http://www.gatewayarch.com/about/history.aspx
Hunt, B. (n.d.). Redlining. Retrieved September 12, 2017, from
http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1050.html
179
Lumos. (n.d.). Lumos LSX Module System. Retrieved November 30, 2017, from
https://www.lumossolar.com/products/lsx-module-system/
Maker Media. (n.d.). What’s a Makerspace? Retrieved October 01, 2017, from
https://spaces.makerspace.com/
Monsanto. (2017). L.E.A.D Initiative. Retrieved November 30, 2017, from
https://monsanto.com/company/outreach/lead-initiative/
Primm, J. N. (1998). Lion of the valley: St. Louis, Missouri, 1764-1980 (3rd ed., Vol.
1). St. Louis: Missouri Historical Society Press.
Schermer, G. (1949). The Fairgrounds Park incident; a study of the factors which
resulted in the outbreak of violence at the Fairgrounds Park Swimming Pool on
June 21, 1949, an account of what happened, and recommendations for
corrective action. Conducted for the St. Louis Council on Human Relations, St.
Louis, Missouri. St. Louis, MO: St. Louis Council on Human Relations.
Silva, E. (2017, September 10). The Longest Day. Retrieved September 12, 2017,
from https://www.riverfronttimes.com/stlouis/the-longest-
day/Content?oid=2469321
Spoutwood Farms. (n.d.). Spoutwood Farm Center. Retrieved September 20, 2017,
from http://www.spoutwood.org/
St. Louis Regional Chamber. (n.d.). Industry Clusters. Retrieved September 09,
2017, from http://www.stlregionalchamber.com/regional-data/industry-clusters
St. Louis Regional Chamber. (n.d.). Education. Retrieved September 09, 2017, from
http://www.stlregionalchamber.com/regional-data/education-regionaldata
System Advisor Model Version 2016.3.14 (SAM 2016.3.14). National Renewable
Energy Laboratory. Golden, CO. Accessed October 31, 2016.
https://sam.nrel.gov/content/downloads.
The Rotarian. (1914, July). World's Largest Open Air Swimming Pool Draws Half
Million. The Rotarian, p. 46. Retrieved September 13, 2017, from
https://books.google.com/books?id=-
fkeAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
180
United Nations Environment Programme. (n.d.). Phytoremediation: An
Environmentally Sound Technology for Pollution Prevention, Control and
Remediation. Retrieved November 29, 2017, from
http://www.unep.or.jp/Ietc/Publications/Freshwater/FMS2/1.asp
University of Kansas. (2017). Section 2. Proclaiming Your Dream: Developing Vision
and Mission Statements. Retrieved September 20, 2017, from
http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/structure/strategic-planning/vision-mission-
statements/main
United States Census Bureau. (n.d.). St. Louis City Census Quick Facts. Retrieved
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/stlouiscitymissouricounty/PST0452
16
U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Census Results (2010). Retrieved September 14,
2017, from http://dynamic.stlouis-mo.gov/census/neighborhood.cfm
U.S. Census Bureau. (2011, August 19). US Census Bureau Publications - Census
of Population and Housing. Retrieved September 09, 2017, from
https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
U.S. Census Bureau. (2015). Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (United
States, U.S. Census Bureau, Housing and Household Economic Statistics
Division, Small Area Estimates Branch, Department of Commerce). Retrieved
https://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/index.html
U.S. Census Bureau (2016). Selected housing characteristics, 2007-2011 American
Community Survey 5-year estimates. Retrieved from
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pi
d=ACS_11_5YR_DP04.
Provides census data based on the 2010 Census results done by the US
Census Bureau. These are broken down into Neighborhoods and wards. They
have also taken this information to show the change in population since last
census.
181
U.S. EPA. (2017, November 21). National Stormwater Calculator. Retrieved
November 29, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/water-research/national-
stormwater-calculator
USDA. (n.d.). Community Supported Agriculture. Retrieved September 28, 2017,
from https://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/community-supported-agriculture
USDA. (2017). Grants & Opportunities. Retrieved November 30, 2017, from
https://www.ams.usda.gov/services/grants
U.S. Green Building Council. (2017). Indoor water use reduction. Retrieved
November 29, 2017, from https://www.usgbc.org/credits/we2
Wallace, W. M. (2017, July 07). American Revolution. Retrieved September 07,
2017, from https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Revolution
Wasko, J. (n.d.). Fairground Park. Retrieved September 12, 2017, from
https://web.archive.org/web/20110720092528/http://coe.umsl.edu/web/centers/tl
c/web/dighistory/play-fairground.cfm
Wayman, N. L. (1970). Fairgrounds. Retrieved September 10, 2017, from
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/archive/neighborhood-histories-norbury-
wayman/fairgrounds/text11.htm
This article is part of a volume of work done by Mr. Norbury Wayman for the St.
Louis Community Development Agency in 1970. This collection gives historical
information about 27 neighborhoods in St. Louis city of the time. Each one of
these articles is cited in the text-only link on its web page. The rest of this
information can be found on the link. cited above.
Wiltse, J. (2007). Contested Waters: A Social History of Swimming Pools in America.
NC: University of North Carolina Press.
182
IMAGE REFERENCES
Image 1: Compton, R. J. (1876). Composite (Pictorial St. Louis) [Digital image].

Retrieved December 3, 2017, from
https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~24321~890020
:Composite--Pictorial-St--Louis-
Image 2: Boehl, E. (2016). View of the Bear Pits at Fairgrounds Park. [Photograph
found in MHM Photographs and Prints Collection, Museum History Museum, St
Louis]. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from
http://data.mohistory.org/molabapps/search/item/resource:154680 (Originally
photographed 1876)
Image 3: Bear Pit in 2017 [Personal photograph taken in Fairground Park, St. Louis,
Missouri]. (2017, July 10).
Image 4: Horse-drawn streetcars at the entrance to Fairgrounds Park. [Photograph
found in Swekosky Notre Dame College Collection, Missouri History Museum,
Fairground Park, St. Louis, Missouri]. (2016). Retrieved December 3, 2017, from
photographed 1885)
Image 5: Fairground Park [Photograph found in Swekosky Notre Dame College

Collection, Missouri History Museum, Fairground Park, St. Louis, Missouri].
(2016). Retrieved December 3, 2017, from
photographed 1890)
Image 6: Butler, W. (2016). William Butler, Principal of Yeatman High School, taking
photographs at Fairground Park. [Photograph found in Swekosky Notre Dame
College Collection, Missouri History Museum, Fairground Park, St. Louis,
Missouri]. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from Swekosky Notre Dame College
Collection (Originally photographed 1894)
Image 7: Washington University in St. Louis: University Libraries. (1895). [Fire

Insurance Map]. Retrieved from http://digital.wustl.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-
idx?c=whi&cc=whi&idno=whi1895.1895.401&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=1
56
Image 8: Aerial view of Fairground Park and surrounding neighborhood. [Photograph

found in St. Louis City Planning Agencies Collection: Series 2: Buildings -- Aerial
Views, Missouri History Museum, Fairground Park, St. Louis, Missouri]. (2016).
183
In Curtiss-Wright Flying Service, Inc. (Author). Retrieved December 3, 2017,
from http://digital.wustl.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-
idx?c=whi&cc=whi&idno=whi1895.1895.401&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=1
56 (Originally photographed 1926)
Image 9: International Association of Rotary Clubs. (1912). World's Largest Open-Air
Swimming Pool Draws Half Million. In the Rotarian (p. 46). Retrieved from
https://books.google.com/books?id=-
fkeAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=%22World%27s+Largest+Open+Air+S
wimming+Pool+Draws+Half+Million%22&source=bl&ots=PnnYAjMKyj&sig=v3iH
J2Mod_AaSphESf0gtcFsM_Y&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi89P7Wg6HWAhUC
w4MKHShOBJkQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=%22World's%20Largest%20Open
%20Air%20Swimming%20Pool%20Draws%20Half%20Million%22&f=false
Image 10: Pearsons, W. (2016). Swimmers at Fairgrounds Park swimming pool

[Photograph found in MHM Photographs and Prints Collection, Missouri History
Museum, Fairground Park, St. Louis, Missouri]. Retrieved December 3, 2017,
from http://data.mohistory.org/molabapps/search/item/resource:145142
(Originally photographed 1920)
Image 11: St. Louis Globe-Democrat. (2010). African-American and Caucasian

Children at Fairground Swimming Pool [Photograph found in St. Louis Globe
Democrat Images, St. Louis Mercantile Library, Fairground Park, St. Louis,
Missouri]. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from
http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm/ref/collection/stlglobedem/id/1070 (Originally
photographed 1949, June 21)
Image 12: A Blood-Stained man sits in the middle of Kossuth Avenue [Photograph
found in St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Fairground Park, St. Louis, Missouri]. (2009).
In P. O'Connor (Author). Retrieved December 3, 2017, from
http://www.stltoday.com/news/pool-riot-pivotal-in-race-relations-city-s-decision-
in/article_914ec52e-4be8-5b09-ac98-e71da7160cc6.html (Originally
photographed 1949, June 21)
Image 13: Alexrk2. (2009). File: USA Missouri location map.svg. Retrieved
December 03, 2017, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USA_Missouri_location_map.svg
Image 14: Planning & Urban Design Agency. (2010, May 11). City of St. Louis
Neighborhoods [Map]. In Citywide Neighborhood Map. Retrieved December 3,
2017, from https://www.stlouis-
184
mo.gov/government/departments/planning/documents/citywide-neighborhood-
map.cfm
Image 15 – 21: Webb, Dalton L. (2017).

Image 22: Persons, W. C. (2016). Swimmers at Fairgrounds Park Swimming pool.
[Photograph found in MHM Photographs and Prints Collection, Missouri History
Museum, Fairground Park, St. Louis, Missouri]. Retrieved December 3, 2017,
from http://data.mohistory.org/molabapps/search/item/resource:145142
(Originally photographed 1920)
Image 23– 29: Webb, Dalton L. (2017).
Image 30: Carpenter, N., & Rosenthal, W. (2012). The essential urban farmer. New
York, NY: Penguin Books.
Image 31 - 72: Webb, Dalton L. (2017).

Image 73 – 74: Autodesk. (n.d.). Green Building Studio. Retrieved from
https://gbs.autodesk.com/GBS/Project

Image 79 – 82: System Advisor Model Version 2016.3.14 (SAM 2016.3.14). National
Renewable Energy Laboratory. Golden, CO. Accessed October 31, 2016.
https://sam.nrel.gov/content/downloads.
Image 83 - 85: Webb, Dalton L. (2017).
Image 86: ClimateMaster Inc. (2011, February 7). ESSENTIALS OF HYDRONICS

FOR GSHP PROFESSIONALS [ Essentials of Hydronics for GSHP
Professionals course manual.]. Http://climatemaster.com/downloads/RP878.pdf,
Oklahoma, OK.
185
186
APPENDICES
187
APPENDIX A - 1915 Housing Ordinance
Gordon, C. (n.d.). Mapping Decline: St. Louis and the Fate of the American
City. Retrieved September 12, 2017, from
188
APPENDIX A – 1939 Uniform Restriction Agreement
189
190
191
Gordon, C. (n.d.). Mapping Decline: St. Louis and the Fate of the American
City. Retrieved September 12, 2017, from
192
APPENDIX C – Larry Isom Reply Questionnaire for North St Louis City Community
1.) What do you think the community needs?
a. This can be activities, community involvement, jobs, stores, shelters etc.
“The community needs an overall plan for development which includes
residential structure (single and multi-units), commercial units, street alteration, to
limit traffic flow. The senior citizen need food, medicine, transportation, home
improvement (interior and exterior), trees and bushes cut off their properties, trash
removal, and safety. Middle age people in the area needs business ownership, jobs
in the community and outside the community, peace and safety on the block and
neighborhood, affordable housing with emphasis on home ownership (65% or
higher), retail stores, trade schools and secondary education and recreational
activity. The Youth need proper diet and access to healthy foods and how to plant
and grow food, economic opportunity that includes business opportunities, and
employment opportunities, trade schools, peace and safety.”
2.) What is your opinion on how the crime in the area can be decreased?
“Crime in the area can be decreased starting with prayer, environmental
successes (businesses, schools, professional people in the community etc.). Street
alterations (less entry and exit streets in the residential areas), reduce the numbers
of vacant building and vacant lots, increase incomes levels of residents and reduce
the level of illegal drug activity.”
3.) Do you think the younger generations have enough to do during the times that
they do not have school?

“There are many neighborhood opportunities available for youth. I believe it’s
a matter of engaging peacefully and safely.”
4.) What is something that you feel is missing in schools in the area that can be
provided through a community center?
“Frankly community schools are missing. Newer more up to date schools are
needed that geared for science and technology. If community centers could be used
193
as secondary education, classes in science and technology, build trades (plumbing,
electrical, masonry, and carpentry, and painting etc.) will be of good use. Life
training classes will be helpful.”
5.) The community center I am envisioning has an urban farming program (teaching
gardening, teaching cooking, and providing programs for all ages), a tool sharing
program (providing tools for the community to borrow that are not easily acquired but
needed for a yard), full size kitchen (providing meals to the public, for the programs
during lunch, for large events, and in emergency situations for the area), and a
community hall (to be used for events by the community center and the community).
Do you think the community would benefit from this?
No Reply Given
6.) Do you have any thoughts or comments that you would like to share?
No Reply Given
194
APPENDIX D – Larry Isom Reply Questionnaire for North St Louis City Community
1.) What do you think the community needs?
a. This can be activities, community involvement, jobs, stores, shelters etc.
2.) What is your opinion on how the crime in the area can be decreased?
3.) Do you think the younger generations have enough to do during the times that
they do not have school?
4.) What is something that you feel is missing in schools in the area that can be
provided through a community center?
5.) The community center I am envisioning has an urban farming program (teaching
gardening, teaching cooking, and providing programs for all ages), a tool
sharing program (providing tools for the community to borrow that are not easily
acquired but needed for a yard), full size kitchen (providing meals to the public,
for the programs during lunch, for large events, and in emergency situations for
the area), and a community hall (to be used for events by the community center
and the community).
Do you think the community would benefit from this?
6.) Do you have any thoughts or comments that you would like to share?
195
APPENDIX E – Final Thesis Presentation Panels
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
VITA
Graduate School
Southern Illinois University
Dalton L. Webb
Daltonwebb1989@gmail.com
Southeast Missouri State University

Bachelors of Science Interdisciplinary: Interior Design and Construction Management
May 2014
Thesis Paper Title:

Community Growth Center Thesis: The Study of The Fairground Park Area &
Its Possible New Future
Major Professor: Shannon McDonald
203

Dalton Webb Fall 2017 Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dalton Webb Fall 2017 Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COMMUNITY GROWTH CENTER THESIS:

B.S. Interdisciplinary: Interior Design and Construction Management, Southeast

COMMUNITY GROWTH CENTER THESIS:

Dalton Lee Webb

A Thesis Submitted in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of

in the field of Architecture

Shannon McDonald, Chair

Jessica Augusta Crowe

Rolando Gonzalez Torres

TITLE: COMMUNITY GROWTH CENTER THESIS: THE STUDY OF THE

MAJOR PROFESSOR: Ms. Shannon McDonald

community a place to be proud of and use far into the future.

I also dedicate this thesis to John Pruitt, my previous professor at Southeast

Missouri State University in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. I would not be in architecture

I would first like to thank my thesis chair Associate Professor Shannon

McDonald at Southern Illinois University Carbondale. She was always available to

help you have given me through this process.

helped me see things that I would normally not see.

To the Neighborhood Development Executive, Dotti McDowell of St. Louis

that I was unaware of.

journey to get here.

exploration, site documentation, and brainstorming.

these neighborhoods. As a neighborhood declines over time the residents

be. Yet their reality is not telling them that.

a reflection of doing just that.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................ iii

LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF IMAGES ...................................................................................................... x

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction ............................................................................. 1

CHAPTER 2 – Method and Reasoning of Choice ........................................... 3

CHAPTER 3 – Research: Concise History of St. Louis ................................... 5

CHAPTER 4 – Research: Fairground Park History ....................................... 10

CHAPTER 5 – Research: Current Demographics ......................................... 26

CHAPTER 6 – Research: North Side St. Louis Analysis ............................... 46

CHAPTER 7 – Community Centers: Case and Precedent Studies ............... 55

CHAPTER 8 – Center Name, Ideology, and Image ...................................... 62

CHAPTER 9 – Overall Building Program ...................................................... 67

CHAPTER 10 – Building Area: Commons Area ............................................ 76

CHAPTER 11 – Building Area: Teaching Kitchen ......................................... 81

CHAPTER 12 – Building Area: Urban Agriculture Center ............................. 86

CHAPTER 14 – Building Area: Recreation and Aquatics Center ................ 108

CHAPTER 15 – Building Area: Daycare ..................................................... 112

CHAPTER 16 – Building Area: Administration ............................................ 116

CHAPTER 17 – Building Design ................................................................. 119

CHAPTER 18 – Project Site Analysis and Considerations .......................... 127

CHAPTER 19 – Project Systems and Sustainability Features .................... 147

CHAPTER 20 – Building Operations ........................................................... 164

CHAPTER 21 – Funding Possibilities ......................................................... 168

CHAPTER 22 – Fairground Park Redesign ................................................ 171

CHAPTER 23 – Summary, Conclusion, Recommendation ......................... 177

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 179

IMAGE REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 184

Appendix A – 1915 Housing Ordinance ...................................................... 189

Appendix B – 1939 uniform Restriction Agreement ..................................... 190

Appendix C – Larry Isom’s Reply to Questionnaire ..................................... 194

Appendix D –North St. Louis Questionnaire ................................................ 196

Appendix E –Thesis Presentation Boards ................................................... 197

VITA .................................................................................................................... 204

Table 1: 2010 Census Data - Missouri ..................................................................... 29

Table 2: 2010 Census Data - St. Louis City ............................................................. 31

Table 3: 2010 Census Data - North St. Louis City ................................................... 33