phoaddict wrote:2100??? HAHA.
I don't think the arch is overpowered! I think if you look at thed picture, it's totally st. louis, with the arch as the dominant feature!
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:phoaddict wrote:2100??? HAHA.
I don't think the arch is overpowered! I think if you look at thed picture, it's totally st. louis, with the arch as the dominant feature!
It doesn't look like there has been any development to the north. What happened? Did they put in parkland?
stlmike wrote:When did St Louis move to Nevada?
southsidepride wrote:I don't know--still not convinced. Maybe I have too much of an emotional attachment since my dad helped build the Arch but I still like the idea of it being the dominant feature on our skyline.
Not necessarily saying the Arch has to forever be the tallest structure in STL, but I'm not wild about just building these taller skyscrapers just to build them.
wheelscomp wrote:Well hopefully if we ever get an 80+ story building it wont look like the AON Center....
Notes from Home wrote:carrieocity kills wrote:Notes from Home wrote:
Carrie, I seriously think I need to buy you a drink next time I'm in STL.
will you be in town Thanksgiving weekend? We will be having our rollerderby championship bout that weekend:) GO SMASHINISTAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'll be in town most of the week before & after Thanksgiving. When's the bout? Maybe I'll buy you that drink if you win.
phoaddict wrote:I've been reading the threads and much analysis and thinking, it seems like pretty much everyone has the same views:
1.) St. Louis is a kick-ass city and deserves much props for this very true fact.
2.) St. Louis has a self-esteem issue among its weary citizens who don't see how great the city is.
3.) The city is markets itself poorly.
4.) The city is troubled by poor vision by many city leaders and "difference makers" (not one individual)
5.) St. Louis is plagued with an anti-development mentality that hinders progressive growth.
I know this has been discussed and might be a stretch for some of you. If what is stated above is true, doesn't that mean that we need to do something drastic to give St. Louis a stepping stone to move forward and to in turn make its citizens proud again!
Here are things that we can feasibly do:
1.) We build that f'ing MO-IL bridge soon and make it beautiful and asthetically perfect
2.) Every building downtown with certain floors must keep its lights on at night (chicago has something like this)
3.) Every building constructed from now on should be modern and glass looking and we mandate an asthetic guideline buildings must pass(vs. the old stoney look of a lot of buildings. Yes, I love the old look, but we need more of a modern edge.)
4.) We add cool lighting to existing bridges.
5.) We lobby to change the liquor licenses of missouri to all be 3am or later and easier to get.
6.) We take over the post-dispatch and replace people that are young, progressive and forward thinking optimists.
7.) We actually build the bottle district and ball park village
8.) We renovate Midtown.
9.) We work with st. louis county and MoDot to line our highways with good highway lights for safer driving.
10.) We add at least 4 good lines for the metrolink connecting our greatest attractions and neighborhoods in the next 5-10 years.
11.) We designate official Ethnic neighborhoods and market them: Chinatown, Little Bosnia, Hispania, etc.
12.) We build the sculpture park downtown.
13.) We increase our spending on elimination of gangs and place private police officers in all metro stops and high traffic areas.
And the last and greatest things we do IMO:
WE BUILD A FREAKING BUILDING TALLER THAN THE ARCH and TALLER THAN ANY BUILDING IN THE STATE (or even Midwest outside of Chicago).
These are steps we can take to break the chain of this non progressiveness infecting the progressive thinkers. We just break the arch height. I think that's the most important thing we can do that can give the greatest positive psychological impact on the city of st. louis. That is why we need to build past the arch and all these other things above, cause it makes us look good. And if we think we look good, we feel better about ourselves.
What are your thoughts??
Tysalpha wrote:phoaddict wrote:You're right about being egocentric. It's wrong to stereotype all st. louisans as mediocre and "can't think big", that's mostly my emotions when I type and my trying to speed type while I work at the same time. I apologize for that. But i do feel that, comparing the people i've met in st. louis to the people ive met around the world. its just my experiences...
However, I do think that st. louis needs to decide what it wants to be. Just from my upbringing and experiences, I think the majority of st. louis deep inside wants to be what it was in 1904, on the world's spotlight. What I have said implies that people think that way, and offer suggestions how to be back on that scale.
Well, who will make it happen? What I hope for now is that people of importance or the eyes of people that can make a difference through their position will read this thread and ideas will stir in their minds. It won't happen if it's not talked about. Maybe in 5 years I'll get to personally taking steps...
Fair enough, pho, we all have our moments.
You're right that there is some soul-searching going on in St. Louis: We're pretty content, but could we be more? How much should we ground in history, and how much should we push forward? These aren't just questions about income and population, they are also questions of identity.
We have been blessed recently with a few people of importance who have had vision (Breckenridge, Danforth, etc.). We just need a few more.
phoaddict wrote:What I'm saying is we CAN be more, but not at the rate at doing what we're doing. The reason why is if we have to really start thinking big and "in your face" if we want to be remotely competitive on a global scale. Yes, global. Why? Because that's the future. It's no longer a 1945 WWII mentality with US vs. X, U.S cities vs US cities. It's all becoming smaller and smaller. Don't believe me? 1.) live abroad and meet friends. Then discover the degree of separation you are from your friend and be amazed. Repeat this several times, then chat with friends who have similar experiences 2.) Study economics. 3.) Observe our economy and watch the news. 4.) Go on facebook and realize the friends you met a while back are on there too, and you still find yourself amazing and easily connected. What does this have to do with cities? People live in cities. Business is mainly made in cities. Business thrives on relationships. Relationships are between people.
ThreeOneFour wrote:phoaddict wrote:What I'm saying is we CAN be more, but not at the rate at doing what we're doing. The reason why is if we have to really start thinking big and "in your face" if we want to be remotely competitive on a global scale. Yes, global. Why? Because that's the future. It's no longer a 1945 WWII mentality with US vs. X, U.S cities vs US cities. It's all becoming smaller and smaller. Don't believe me? 1.) live abroad and meet friends. Then discover the degree of separation you are from your friend and be amazed. Repeat this several times, then chat with friends who have similar experiences 2.) Study economics. 3.) Observe our economy and watch the news. 4.) Go on facebook and realize the friends you met a while back are on there too, and you still find yourself amazing and easily connected. What does this have to do with cities? People live in cities. Business is mainly made in cities. Business thrives on relationships. Relationships are between people.
That's why I'd love to see city-county consolidation, albeit with boroughs within to preserve some degree of autonomy for specific areas. We've spent way too much time competing amongst ourselves. In some ways, St. Louis competes with Kansas City, but sometimes it competes with St. Charles. At any rate, I agree with you, we need to think bigger. And the Balkanization of St. Louis County doesn't help matters. How can we as a region compete globally when so much time is spent on Brentwood competing with Richmond Heights or Fenton competing with Sunset Hills?
If we had 1.4 million people fighting on the same side, and if the combined St. Louis city-county could forge better relationships with the other 1.4 million people in the metro area, I think that would be a hell of a good start toward competing on a larger scale.
Of course, the local naysayers really get fired up once anyone mentions the word "merger", so I'll meekly retreat to the corner now.
TheWayoftheArch wrote:For the record I want to say that I am a huge fan of the term anti-good economics.
so intelligent arent I? Notes from Home wrote:If it makes you feel better pho I don't think you're overreaching. In fact I want to think even bigger. Is it still too late to move the nation's capital to St. Louis?
