Hmm, IIRC from the design process, the main greenway would run along Forest Park avenue and turn south on Spring. Maybe the Foundry portions are secondary paths connecting the Foundry to the Greenway....
Hah, yeah you got it. Got a better route? I'd love to hear your input.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 24, 2019^So, the Greenway trail will pass through a dead, uninviting block-long space between a garage and the wall of the Alamo Drafthouse, and then turn east and have to cross two, presumably very busy, garage access ramps...
The route would be fine if they had retail where the west end of the garage is, and / or on the east side of the Alamo Drafthouse building, and then add a signal to take the greenway across FPA (as well as providing much-needed pedestrian access to the Foundry).stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 24, 2019Hah, yeah you got it. Got a better route? I'd love to hear your input.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 24, 2019^So, the Greenway trail will pass through a dead, uninviting block-long space between a garage and the wall of the Alamo Drafthouse, and then turn east and have to cross two, presumably very busy, garage access ramps...
But the best route would have been to extend the elevated trestle east and ramp down to grade at Spring Ave., and then make your trail bike path connections to the north and maybe eventually south from there.
- 6,120
This is a bit of an aside, but having been away all summer I missed the installation of the glass on the clerestory window. Driving east on 40 at night the lights of westbound cars reflecting off the windows really create an interesting effect. It's almost like a rather abstract video wall. Anyway . . . that whole corridor is utterly transformed from what it was just a year ago. The whole highway seems brighter as a result, even on the lower deck. Between that and the armory the change is simply stunning.
I wonder where the conceptual pedestrian bridge connecting Foundry and Armory is proposed to be located? Would that be Spring Ave as it would make a lot of senseurbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 26, 2019The route would be fine if they had retail where the west end of the garage is, and / or on the east side of the Alamo Drafthouse building, and then add a signal to take the greenway across FPA (as well as providing much-needed pedestrian access to the Foundry).stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 24, 2019Hah, yeah you got it. Got a better route? I'd love to hear your input.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 24, 2019^So, the Greenway trail will pass through a dead, uninviting block-long space between a garage and the wall of the Alamo Drafthouse, and then turn east and have to cross two, presumably very busy, garage access ramps...
But the best route would have been to extend the elevated trestle east and ramp down to grade at Spring Ave., and then make your trail bike path connections to the north and maybe eventually south from there.
- 1,864
dredger wrote: ↑Oct 26, 2019I wonder where the conceptual pedestrian bridge connecting Foundry and Armory is proposed to be located? Would that be Spring Ave as it would make a lot of sense
As far as I can tell, it is still being studied, and nothing has been decided yet. I think the Spring Ave. pedestrian bridge idea was simply thrown out there by someone because there was a viaduct there previously, and it would connect the Foundry to the Armory and Grand Metro station. But there are alternative routes being studied up Grand and Vandeventer and / or along the Metro right-of-way from the new Cortex Metro station - none of which require a costly pedestrian bridge over a major highway, for which nobody has identified a funding source.
Chouteau Greenway Master Plan
It's too bad nobody involved had the foresight to include space for the greenway trail along the new Grand Avenue viaduct...
NPS prevented added retail fronting FPA at the Alamo location. The path does remain elevated to the east all the way to Spring. Along the front of the new retail/office buildings there is a path that connects through the entire site.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 26, 2019The route would be fine if they had retail where the west end of the garage is, and / or on the east side of the Alamo Drafthouse building, and then add a signal to take the greenway across FPA (as well as providing much-needed pedestrian access to the Foundry).stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 24, 2019Hah, yeah you got it. Got a better route? I'd love to hear your input.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 24, 2019^So, the Greenway trail will pass through a dead, uninviting block-long space between a garage and the wall of the Alamo Drafthouse, and then turn east and have to cross two, presumably very busy, garage access ramps...
But the best route would have been to extend the elevated trestle east and ramp down to grade at Spring Ave., and then make your trail bike path connections to the north and maybe eventually south from there.
It's pretty much been decided that there will be a pedestrian bridge linking the 2. The cost isn't as high as you think. Because of the previous viaduct getting the easement wouldn't be as difficult as it would be if it was in a different location. There have been mentions of monetary pledges by private families who are investing in the area. There have been a few design charettes with the GRG/Stoss/LJC team for this area with all of the developers and the results are pretty kick ass, but have yet to be made public.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 26, 2019As far as I can tell, it is still being studied, and nothing has been decided yet. I think the Spring Ave. pedestrian bridge idea was simply thrown out there by someone because there was a viaduct there previously, and it would connect the Foundry to the Armory and Grand Metro station. But there are alternative routes being studied up Grand and Vandeventer and / or along the Metro right-of-way from the new Cortex Metro station - none of which require a costly pedestrian bridge over a major highway, for which nobody has identified a funding source.dredger wrote: ↑Oct 26, 2019I wonder where the conceptual pedestrian bridge connecting Foundry and Armory is proposed to be located? Would that be Spring Ave as it would make a lot of sense
Chouteau Greenway Master Plan
It's too bad nobody involved had the foresight to include space for the greenway trail along the new Grand Avenue viaduct...
I always thought it would be really cool if the double-decker section of 40 through this area had ambient lighting put underneath it like this:
![]()
Fronting FPA sure, but not on the path between Alamo and the garage. And I do not believe that the NPS prevented building 1-story retail (relative to street grade) fronting FPA, where the NW corner of the garage is, and certainly would not have prevented retail built into the garage itself. I do believe that was all Steve Smith.stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 27, 2019NPS prevented added retail fronting FPA at the Alamo location. The path does remain elevated to the east all the way to Spring. Along the front of the new retail/office buildings there is a path that connects through the entire site.
There will be an elevated path to the east, but it is not the greenway trail? Or do you mean that the greenway trail forks at the Alamo building? Because earlier, you said that the trail turns north and and then turns to run along the south side of FPA...
Good to hear. I am looking forward to seeing some proposals. I will add that the cost is very high for most of the proposals I have seen, but the cost will obviously vary a great deal depending on what is being proposed. A simple bare bones pedestrian bridge in a chain-link cage over the highway with stair access on both sides would be cheap.stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 27, 2019It's pretty much been decided that there will be a pedestrian bridge linking the 2. The cost isn't as high as you think. Because of the previous viaduct getting the easement wouldn't be as difficult as it would be if it was in a different location. There have been mentions of monetary pledges by private families who are investing in the area. There have been a few design charettes with the GRG/Stoss/LJC team for this area with all of the developers and the results are pretty kick ass, but have yet to be made public.
However, a 10-15' wide bridge carrying a bike path and running trail, with ADA ramps on both sides of the highway, lighting, security cameras, call buttons, etc. will be a whole lot more expensive. Extend that all the way south over the railroad tracks to the Iron Hill site, and you are easily talking tens of millions of dollars.
I never said the NPS blocked retail in front of the garage portion, only on the Alamo side. There were site limitations preventing retail fronting both sides of the garage. It was either retail on FPA blocking the garage or retail on the south side within the development blocking the garage. Couldn't have it both ways.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 27, 2019Fronting FPA sure, but not on the path between Alamo and the garage. And I do not believe that the NPS prevented building 1-story retail (relative to street grade) fronting FPA, where the NW corner of the garage is, and certainly would not have prevented retail built into the garage itself. I do believe that was all Steve Smith.stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 27, 2019NPS prevented added retail fronting FPA at the Alamo location. The path does remain elevated to the east all the way to Spring. Along the front of the new retail/office buildings there is a path that connects through the entire site.
There will be an elevated path to the east, but it is not the greenway trail? Or do you mean that the greenway trail forks at the Alamo building? Because earlier, you said that the trail turns north and and then turns to run along the south side of FPA...
Yes there is a elevated trail on the south side of the mixed use buildings. When you arrive via the trestle and get to the corner of the Alamo, mixed use, garage you have a decision to make. Either continue north, where the trail turns east at FPA and continues to Spring, take a stair or elevator down to the main level, turn left for the Alamo main entry, turn right to enter the second level of the west mixed use building or continue all the way elevated towards Spring. It will also be how you access the second level of the mixed use buildings.
You can see it on the construction camera.
I'm not talking about a .4 mile stretch of elevated walkway. I'm talking about a .02 mile stretch over the highway. And yes you are right, things cost money, water is wet.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 27, 2019Good to hear. I am looking forward to seeing some proposals. I will add that the cost is very high for most of the proposals I have seen, but the cost will obviously vary a great deal depending on what is being proposed. A simple bare bones pedestrian bridge in a chain-link cage over the highway with stair access on both sides would be cheap.stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 27, 2019It's pretty much been decided that there will be a pedestrian bridge linking the 2. The cost isn't as high as you think. Because of the previous viaduct getting the easement wouldn't be as difficult as it would be if it was in a different location. There have been mentions of monetary pledges by private families who are investing in the area. There have been a few design charettes with the GRG/Stoss/LJC team for this area with all of the developers and the results are pretty kick ass, but have yet to be made public.
However, a 10-15' wide bridge carrying a bike path and running trail, with ADA ramps on both sides of the highway, lighting, security cameras, call buttons, etc. will be a whole lot more expensive. Extend that all the way south over the railroad tracks to the Iron Hill site, and you are easily talking tens of millions of dollars.
- 2,430
So anyone know what the deal is with lack of announcements on shops? Trouble leasing?
Well, you said, "The cost isn't as high as you think.", but you never clarified what sort of bridge was being proposed. Besides, we were talking about the Greenway trail / bike path connections, and I don't see how a narrow pedestrian bridge over the highway with stairs on each end is going to cut it as a trail connection. Plus, I thought the main point of the Spring Ave. pedestrian bridge proposal(s) was to be able to make the Greenway trail connection south to Chouteau, and provide better pedestrian and trail access to the Grand Metro station from north and south. Connecting the Armory to the Foundry was just an added benefit that came along later when both projects began...stlnative wrote: ↑Oct 28, 2019I'm not talking about a .4 mile stretch of elevated walkway. I'm talking about a .02 mile stretch over the highway. And yes you are right, things cost money, water is wet.urbanitas wrote: ↑Oct 27, 2019Good to hear. I am looking forward to seeing some proposals. I will add that the cost is very high for most of the proposals I have seen, but the cost will obviously vary a great deal depending on what is being proposed. A simple bare bones pedestrian bridge in a chain-link cage over the highway with stair access on both sides would be cheap.
However, a 10-15' wide bridge carrying a bike path and running trail, with ADA ramps on both sides of the highway, lighting, security cameras, call buttons, etc. will be a whole lot more expensive. Extend that all the way south over the railroad tracks to the Iron Hill site, and you are easily talking tens of millions of dollars.
Below is what you said (back when everyone thought we were talking about a surface parking lot with below-grade parking levels underneath). "Unobstructed view" implies no structures, retail, garage, or otherwise:stlnative wrote:I never said the NPS blocked retail in front of the garage portion, only on the Alamo side. There were site limitations preventing retail fronting both sides of the garage. It was either retail on FPA blocking the garage or retail on the south side within the development blocking the garage. Couldn't have it both ways.
And yes, we could have it both ways, if they built the retail space on and into the garage structure, or even better, built the garage on the west side of the site where it should have been in the first place, instead of along Forest Park Ave...The garage appears to be a surface parking garage from FPA, because historic guidelines required there be a unobstructed view from FPA to the main Foundry building. The garage has 3 levels with only the top level visible from FPA. The garage is subgrade on the north side, but all open on the others. There has been extensive excavation and a massive retaining wall built for this.
Haha, nah, having retail on both sides would not be possible. The width of a 2 way garage is a minimum of 60', in order to get a garage design to be able to go from ground level to top level you need a double sided garage, and a minimum of 120', not including the size of the structure which would add another 3 to 4'. From property line to northern face of the Foundry is 240', subtract the 120 and you have 120. Subtract another 12' for a fire access lane and you have 108. You need another 6 feet of separation between both new buildings and the garage because of fire separation codes and you're now left with 96. Leave another 12 feet out of sidewalks on the north and the future trail and you have 84. A 8' utility easement was required for new transformers and left with 76. Divide by 2 and you are left with 38' of width for a new building. Not happening.And yes, we could have it both ways, if they built the retail space on and into the garage structure, or even better, built the garage on the west side of the site where it should have been in the first place, instead of along Forest Park Ave...
I'm not sure if you've ever tried to design a parking garage before, but they're more complex that people think, add in a severely constrained site and it multiples that. There were multiple height constraints that needed to be met. Level 2 needed to align with the bottom level of the corner Byco building, and also needed to align with the main level of the Alamo building and the new second level mixed use level 2. Add in a height requirement for box delivery trucks to service the backside of the main level of the mixed use. Oh also there was also a constraint that the level 2 entry needed to be at a height that met FPA at grade. Then the third level needed to align with the upper level of the Byco building and the upper level of FPA grade. To say it was a challenging design problem is an understatement.
Garage was never planned to go on the west site as that area wasn't under FoPa control until design plans were well underway and too far along. Besides, that area is reserved for the future phase 2.
- 2,419
I was looking at the City Foundry website, and it seems they have found 13 takers for the 20 food hall slots.
Buenos Aires Cafe
Chela Tapas
City Taco Shack
Crop Circle by Farm Truk
Good Day
Hello Poke
Juce Box
Mokyu Mokyu
Murf's Deli
Natalie's Cakes
Press Waffle Co.
Sumax: Hummus & Wraps
Ukraft
Buenos Aires Cafe
Chela Tapas
City Taco Shack
Crop Circle by Farm Truk
Good Day
Hello Poke
Juce Box
Mokyu Mokyu
Murf's Deli
Natalie's Cakes
Press Waffle Co.
Sumax: Hummus & Wraps
Ukraft
- 2,056
I know that City Taco Shop is Kalbi Taco - its going to be their 2nd location. They have a bunch of signage in their shop saying they are moving there.
- 2,419
Yep, that's Kalbi Taco Shack.
I'm also noticing a few of these places are brick & mortar locations for food trucks around town - Crop Circle by Farm Truk and Ukraft.
I wonder if the developers will go back to that pool to find takers for any of the remaining seven slots. I'd like to see them make some calls to trucks like Balkan Treat Box, Guerrilla Street Food, Vincent Van Doughnut, etc.
I'm also noticing a few of these places are brick & mortar locations for food trucks around town - Crop Circle by Farm Truk and Ukraft.
I wonder if the developers will go back to that pool to find takers for any of the remaining seven slots. I'd like to see them make some calls to trucks like Balkan Treat Box, Guerrilla Street Food, Vincent Van Doughnut, etc.
It'd be cool if they put a sugarfire or a High Point. I know both those stl franchises have been expanding. Both would fit in nicely as they are both trendy, "instagrammable" places. (Sugarfire in Wentzville and High Point downtown.)