Up to 5% from 3% but the opera house and central library are up as well . Might I suggest just voting for city to river?
With all the current talk about the Rams dome, I can't get the stupid highway right in front of it out of my head. Every time I picture the dome, I also picture the highway. It makes me want to vomit. I will be crafting a letter to the mayor, although in a lighter tone than the previous sentences.
The day the Washington Avenue skybridge was knocked down, I seem to remember Slay quoted along the lines of how it was a historic day and would better connect the city. The skybridge coming down was important, but the continuity ends at the highway. I have looked for Slay's quotes from that day, but haven't had any luck. Anyone know where I could find them?
The day the Washington Avenue skybridge was knocked down, I seem to remember Slay quoted along the lines of how it was a historic day and would better connect the city. The skybridge coming down was important, but the continuity ends at the highway. I have looked for Slay's quotes from that day, but haven't had any luck. Anyone know where I could find them?
- 1,320
The link to a previous version of this died. Not sure whether folks got to see it. Arch Parking Alternatives Study draft from June 2012:
Was watching Curious George 2 with my daughter and noticed this:
Best version on what the arch should look like that I have seen.
![]()
Best version on what the arch should look like that I have seen.
- 592
I don't think this link has been posted to this thread yet: It's a P-D look back from 2011 at the construction of the Third Street Highway from 1948 to its opening in 1955. From 1955 to 1963, the I-70 lanes from Washington to Poplar were a boulevard (at-grade with the E-W downtown streets and signalized); from Poplar south to Russell and Gravois it was a grade-separated highway (that became I-55). The second picture in the slideshow shows what the lanes would look like if they had left the boulevard in place.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 58e35.html
Another view of the Third Street Highway is at the UMSL website:
http://www.umsl.edu/virtualstl/phase2/1 ... ssway.html
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 58e35.html
Another view of the Third Street Highway is at the UMSL website:
http://www.umsl.edu/virtualstl/phase2/1 ... ssway.html
- 124
A mention in a Scientific American article today:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ys-2013-03In St. Louis, I-70 is vastly underused and severs a resurgent downtown from the Mississippi River. While plans are in the works to create a parklike platform over the highway, reconnecting the city with the Gateway Arch and the river, local advocacy groups such as City to River are calling for the highway to be replaced entirely by a boulevard.
- 3,429
If they build the Boulevard instead of the lid, they could build a pedestrian tunnel under it and have it come straight into the lower level of the Arch museum, -- back where that small crowd of people wandered looking for the exit.
![]()
Expanded Museum by CityArchRiver 2015, on Flickr
It would be a wide indoor tunnel with people movers like the one from the EJ Dome into Lumiere and could to be used by anyone who doesn't want to cross the boulevard.
![]()
My wife remarked that it will be a very long walk for older folks from the parking garages downtown all the way to the Arch legs. The buried tunnel / people movers tunnel could start on the West side of 4th Street to help people get across 4th street, and have another entrance / exit in Luther Ely Park -- all with escalators down to the tunnel like the one at Lumiere.
Or they could put in flying walkways from the Kiley's later design plan over the Boulevard. Or both.
Expanded Museum by CityArchRiver 2015, on Flickr
It would be a wide indoor tunnel with people movers like the one from the EJ Dome into Lumiere and could to be used by anyone who doesn't want to cross the boulevard.
My wife remarked that it will be a very long walk for older folks from the parking garages downtown all the way to the Arch legs. The buried tunnel / people movers tunnel could start on the West side of 4th Street to help people get across 4th street, and have another entrance / exit in Luther Ely Park -- all with escalators down to the tunnel like the one at Lumiere.
Or they could put in flying walkways from the Kiley's later design plan over the Boulevard. Or both.
- 11K
The walk from Ballpark East or Kiener garages will be shorter than the current walk from the North Arch garage.
- 3,429
Yeah, I saw their map with the little circles that showed the distance from the edge of the current arch parking garage to the North leg, and compared that to the edge of the closest parking garage downtown to the West entrance of the new museum at Memorial Drive.Alex Ihnen wrote:The walk from Ballpark East or Kiener garages will be shorter than the current walk from the North Arch garage.
They should have measured, say, from the closest parking spot in both garages, to an Arch leg. People want to touch the Arch and look at the river.
I like their idea of defining a "cart path" all the way around the grounds so visitors can ride to the riverfront and back to the West entrance. Maybe it could include a stop at the Kiener Plaza parking garages.
Looking down Wash Ave. without 70 messing up the vista: May/June 1952
![]()
Austin is looking to tackle a similar challenge with a unique, expensive approach. What are the odds of this becoming reality?
http://kutnews.org/post/should-austin-b ... s-new-look
http://kutnews.org/post/should-austin-b ... s-new-look
The so-called “Cut & Cap” plan, which was proposed by urban designer and architect Sinclair Black, would submerge I-35 underground from River Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd, and cover the highway with an urban boulevard and a park.
Black has estimated the cost of the project at about $550 million.
Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole, had this to say about the potential design:
“Cities across the country are engaging in innovative approaches to the design and use of their aging highway infrastructure and seeing them as opportunities for new boulevards and parks. As a result, neighborhoods have been stitched back together, noise and smog have been reduced, and real estate values have increased.
- 8,155
Seems like Austin is looking at a smaller "Big Dig," which despite the cost overruns, does seem to have benefited Boston.
As for Saint Louis, I think I would have preferred the much simpler three-block cap that was originally proposed over the CAR plan. In addition to the need to add ramps, close streets, etc., CAR's having just one block of "park" over the depressed lanes is underwhelming.
As for Saint Louis, I think I would have preferred the much simpler three-block cap that was originally proposed over the CAR plan. In addition to the need to add ramps, close streets, etc., CAR's having just one block of "park" over the depressed lanes is underwhelming.
Texas, just hoping that St. Louis leadership would recognize the very very low hanging fruit of a very cheap option of knocking a raised freeway section between Laclede's Landing and Downtown.
Cost would substantially less then what Austin is proposing and a rounding error compared to Boston big dig. In addition, time impact to traffic would probably be on the scale single digit minutes if that. Anything that shows a positive would probably result in a bigger and better plan to tackle the depressed section even after the lid. In that regards, almost prefer the single block lid in some respects
Which gets to a question, does anyone know if the proposed traffic study of removing the raised freeway section was still being done? Believe it was instigated by Downtown St. Louis partnership instead of MoDOT or City and therefore they are pretty much free to publish whatever they want.
Cost would substantially less then what Austin is proposing and a rounding error compared to Boston big dig. In addition, time impact to traffic would probably be on the scale single digit minutes if that. Anything that shows a positive would probably result in a bigger and better plan to tackle the depressed section even after the lid. In that regards, almost prefer the single block lid in some respects
Which gets to a question, does anyone know if the proposed traffic study of removing the raised freeway section was still being done? Believe it was instigated by Downtown St. Louis partnership instead of MoDOT or City and therefore they are pretty much free to publish whatever they want.
- 5,433
Agreed. And in Austin, Texas, they'll get 'er done.roger wyoming II wrote:Seems like Austin is looking at a smaller "Big Dig," which despite the cost overruns, does seem to have benefited Boston.
Whatever happened to that plan? Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater! The current plan is underwhelming. It's like we studied the studies of our studies for all of these years. And then you have MoDOT's complete unwillingness to look at best practices, as other cities have eliminated stretches of superfluous freeway mileage in their downtown areas. And I'm not just talking about progressive places like San Francisco (in which the elevated section of The Embarcadero was removed)- I'm thinking of places like Louisville and Oklahoma City where the leaders seem to get it more than ours.As for Saint Louis, I think I would have preferred the much simpler three-block cap that was originally proposed over the CAR plan. In addition to the need to add ramps, close streets, etc., CAR's having just one block of "park" over the depressed lanes is underwhelming.
- 1,320
My recollection is that the three-block lid was dropped because it would have been classified as a "tunnel" and therefore brought with it lots of additional regulations and costs. They're building the widest "bridge" allowed, IIRC.
My vote was for a boulevard, though--er, wait--I guess I didn't get a vote. Never mind.
My vote was for a boulevard, though--er, wait--I guess I didn't get a vote. Never mind.
- 5,433
Presbyterian, I believe your recollection is correct.
My first preference, like most of us here, is a boulevard with the simple lid over it to accommodate pedestrian traffic without crossings. But the three-block lid would've been the next best thing as it would have eliminated physical and visual barriers, at least for the three blocks of Interstate 70 that were covered. It's just a shame that we're going to wind up with a half-arsed solution, and the money that could have gone to a better solution will instead be spent on more ramps on and off of Interstate 70/future Interstate 44.
My first preference, like most of us here, is a boulevard with the simple lid over it to accommodate pedestrian traffic without crossings. But the three-block lid would've been the next best thing as it would have eliminated physical and visual barriers, at least for the three blocks of Interstate 70 that were covered. It's just a shame that we're going to wind up with a half-arsed solution, and the money that could have gone to a better solution will instead be spent on more ramps on and off of Interstate 70/future Interstate 44.
- 8,155
Right. When all is said and done, I don't think the three block lid would have been much more expensive than the jumbled mess being built now.threeonefour wrote:Presbyterian, I believe your recollection is correct.
My first preference, like most of us here, is a boulevard with the simple lid over it to accommodate pedestrian traffic without crossings. But the three-block lid would've been the next best thing as it would have eliminated physical and visual barriers, at least for the three blocks of Interstate 70 that were covered. It's just a shame that we're going to wind up with a half-arsed solution, and the money that could have gone to a better solution will instead be spent on more ramps on and off of Interstate 70/future Interstate 44.
- 11K
I don't think the three-block lid was a particularly good idea, and yes, it would have been a tunnel (requiring millions of $ in ventilation, etc. etc.), but not if it weren't a highway. The real trick is de-designating this stretch - then you have a whole lot of options.
It also helps the state capital is less than a mile away.threeonefour wrote:Agreed. And in Austin, Texas, they'll get 'er done.roger wyoming II wrote:Seems like Austin is looking at a smaller "Big Dig," which despite the cost overruns, does seem to have benefited Boston.
- 5,433
It certainly doesn't hurt. It also doesn't hurt that it's one of the fastest growing regions in one of the fastest growing states.dweebe wrote:It also helps the state capital is less than a mile away.threeonefour wrote:Agreed. And in Austin, Texas, they'll get 'er done.roger wyoming II wrote:Seems like Austin is looking at a smaller "Big Dig," which despite the cost overruns, does seem to have benefited Boston.