urbanSTL

ThreeOneFour wrote:Look at other threads in this (South Side Development) forum, like those devoted to Loughborough Commons and Southtown Centre. I cannot think of two developments in St. Louis that are more disappointing, and I cannot believe that our leaders are content to repeat those mistakes on Lafayette west of Tucker.



Grover, I really like that infill too. I wish we'd see more modern designs like this for infill, and fewer mullet houses.

This is what continues to baffle me. There is such a large gap between what is proven to work in urban environments and what cities and developers are actually doing in St. Louis. How do we close that gap? Continuing education for politicians?

Thinking ahead -- this site on Bohemian Hill may be prime to tie to the Falstaff and Lemp sites with a southbound MetroLink line.

Back to the possibility of fronting a grocery store on the street, I think it can be done by having a store that has no rear. 1, scale back the size of the store (it is planned to be almost 26,000 square feet). 2. Put loading bays on one side. 3. place a cafe/prepared food section with tables along Lafayette with large windows and maybe a street front patio; area could not be used to bring carts in and out of premises. 4. have a main entrance/parking around back on the I-55 side. Whats wrong with that?

trent wrote:^

You are incorrect. You change up the design of the building to filter the masses of your shoppers through a back entrance (usually can be done with a side hallway that leads to the front -- some places have little cafes there), while still having a front entrance for walkups.

True, I have seen this done. Just from my experience, I only see this done when there is no land to build a large parking lot on - only if their is a garage or it's a small niche grocery store.



Does anyone have examples of free-standing grocery stores that butt up to the street and have a parking lot in the rear? I can't think of any in Chicago, only ones that have condos or offices above on multiple levels.

metzgda wrote:

trent wrote:^





Does anyone have examples of free-standing grocery stores that butt up to the street and have a parking lot in the rear? I can't think of any in Chicago, only ones that have condos or offices above on multiple levels.

Going from memory, there is a Dominics in a multi-story building, by the El station near DePauls campus in Lincoln Park. Stopped therefor batteries on the way down to the loop. It comes up to the street, probably about 30 to 40,000 sq. ft. on 2 levels, full service, yuppie store, good stuff but expensive and small selection.



There is also the massive 2 story Home Depot west of there, which comes up to the street, the only example of a true big box in an urban setting outside of Europe.

Giant Eagle in Pittsburgh. There are a number of these stand alone grocery stores that front the sidewalks. I've even seen one with underground parking. In particular, the one at 1901 Murray Ave, strikes seems like the ideal that grocery stores should be striving for. I don't actually have any pictures but I figured that if anybody here was determined enough to find that, they could.

stellar wrote:This is what continues to baffle me. There is such a large gap between what is proven to work in urban environments and what cities and developers are actually doing in St. Louis. How do we close that gap? Continuing education for politicians?

I'm baffled too. Are our politicians' expectations lowered given the city's decades-long and spectacular decline in population and businesses? Or do they just not get out of town often enough to see the best practices in place in similar cities? I'm guessing it's a little bit of both, although I also think city government is still somewhat dysfunctional by design.



I'd be willing to let an alderman or two, or even Hizzoner, hitch a ride to Chicago to point out some good examples of urban development. Granted, I get tired of STL vs. Chicago comparisons, and the Windy City's development record isn't perfect by any means, but I don't even see a desire among many in this city to strive for something better. What gives?



Like many of you, I'm (almost always) a tireless booster of city living. However, I'm tired of new developments that make no attempt to pay respect to the incredible built environment that can be found in much of our city. I'm tired of said built environment being routinely sacrificed (the Century Building, possibly Bohemian Hill, etc.) for schlocky new developments. And I'm tired of politicians that just don't get it, even when a significant number of citizens express their concerns and opposition legitimately and offer reasonable alternatives.

Beer City wrote:

metzgda wrote:

trent wrote:^





Does anyone have examples of free-standing grocery stores that butt up to the street and have a parking lot in the rear? I can't think of any in Chicago, only ones that have condos or offices above on multiple levels.

Going from memory, there is a Dominics in a multi-story building, by the El station near DePauls campus in Lincoln Park. Stopped therefor batteries on the way down to the loop. It comes up to the street, probably about 30 to 40,000 sq. ft. on 2 levels, full service, yuppie store, good stuff but expensive and small selection.



There is also the massive 2 story Home Depot west of there, which comes up to the street, the only example of a true big box in an urban setting outside of Europe.

What I meant by my prior post is stand-alone grocery stores. I know of the Dominicks by DePauls campus you talk about, but it's in a multi-use building with floors above the Dominicks containing either offices or residences. Now the Home Depot I think is stand-alone if I remember correctly, so that is one example, however, there is no land near to build a parking lot.

Whole Foods in New Orleans. I went there once while visiting a friend. Parking in the back, store abutting the front.



Where's Rollin Stanley? Isn't this something he should be able to help with?

Re: baffled

A part of the explanation may be that real estate investment decisions are made on a 3-5 year track. If investor/owners had to take a longer view before being rewarded with a return or in the tax code, chances are we'd see smarter design and a different behavior.



This may make an outstanding suggestion for a presentation and discussion at the Investments in the City meeting sponsored by the Urban Land Institute-St. Louis Chapter, scheduled for May 2.

Thats a good question - where is Rollin Stanley. I haven;t heard a peep from him in months.



by the way - Alderwoman Young responded to my e-mail. She basically said that she would foward my concerns to the developers and that the second phase may not happen. Not exactly a satisfying response but a response nonetheless. .... too bad the underlying current reeked of "well I can't do anything about it." .... I mean come on - doesn't she have some say here?



by the way 2: according to my spell check, "froward" is a word.

Stopping Phase-Two is only half the battle. We must also demand a more urban design, lest this retail center becomes the next half-empty, shopping-cart-strewn Southtown Centre.

oh I agree ..... don't get me wrong. and for the record - she didn;t say "we will stop phase two," she said "well it may not happen ....." Like I said - she seems to have a hands off attitude about the whole thing.

I am sorry for the strong language, but Phyllis Young is a LIAR. She kept this whole project under her hat and away from her constituents until it was a done deal. She used eminent domain on extant buildings west of 13th street, and denied it on the radio. She threatened Bohemian Hill residents with eminent domain in an email, from which she has now retreated, and denies sending. Nobody should trust her on this, she has been planning on ramming this up the 7th ward's ass from the beginning, and will string us all along until it is too late if we let her. I am organizing people to post fliers and possibly knock on doors in Lafayette Square this weekend. Soulard to follow. If anybody is interested PM me.

Yeah I've heard the accusations against Ms. Young before ... my only question is "why?" What does she stand to gain out of sneaking this through? Where are the guys who directed "loose change" when you need them .....

Hmm . . . not how I remember her:

Brutal! I don't know what she has to gain from this. She is rumored to not be interested in re-election. I doubt she is getting some kind of kickback (though I may be naieve). She lives in Soulard, I wonder if she just really wants a grocery store. She lives far enough away that she won't have to look at it, but she'll be able to buy her fiber supplements, Geritol, and Depends there without having to drive to South Grand. I don't know, we all think that because people live in the city that they have an urban mentality, but I guess that is not necessarily true. Maybe she lives here because she just always has, or inherited a house or something. Maybe she doesn't have any idea about progressive planning and thinks that her main job as Alderwoman is to answer emails about broken sidewalks? She knows that people wanted a grocery store so she got them one. She may be completely confused by the opposition (if she has even noticed).

Let's play nice, kids.

markofucity wrote:by the way 2: according to my spell check, "froward" is a word.

Froward = habitually disposed to disobedience and opposition



How appropriate

She knows that people wanted a grocery store so she got them one.

I think you're probably right. I can imagine that if you've lived in the city for the last 20 years or more, a grocery store, ANY grocery store seems like a good idea. Maybe some of our ward representatives just aren't aware of what's possible in this new millenium!

Sorry, sorry. you are right Debaliviere. No more personal attacks I promise. Besides, they are too funny and I am going to get in trouble laughing out loud at work

TGE-ATW wrote:Sorry, sorry. you are right Debaliviere. No more personal attacks I promise. Besides, they are too funny and I am going to get in trouble laughing out loud at work

I laughed too - but I have to maintain my moderatorly duties.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:These are the things politicians do.

Especially in Saint Louis.

Matt wrote:A part of the explanation may be that real estate investment decisions are made on a 3-5 year track. If investor/owners had to take a longer view before being rewarded with a return or in the tax code, chances are we'd see smarter design and a different behavior.

That's the crux of the problem at Southtown Centre, and I have no reason to believe developers would be in any more of a rush to attract tenants beyond the announced anchors to this center.



I'd like to think this situation could change for the better, and I'd like to help the cause when my schedule clears in a couple of weeks, but I'm not getting my hopes up. There are just too many people in this town (especially in power) that don't get it.