CityArchRiver

terence d · PostJan 16, 2013#1262013-01-16T19:22+00:00

roger wyoming II wrote:I wouldn't rule it out. Its a matter of city leadership and future funding sources, and I can see the idea of at least removing the elevated lanes north of the Arch gaining ground and possibly integrating into a boulevard that dips below the lid/park.

Right, what I was mainly getting at is wondering how much the current City+Arch+River plan might limit things over the next one-to-three decades as far as another decent sized project (such as the Blvd or removing the elevated lanes) occurring. In a sense of citizens/leadership saying "We just did a $250/300/500 (however much it ends up being) million project right there, lets give a different area in the city/state some attention".

The ultimate goal is to eliminate highway/highspeed traffic in the area and return to the old (or a typical) street grid, right? For example, (caution: dreams ahead) could you imagine the elevated lanes to the north being removed, possibly placed completely underground, letting entire span of highway run underground for the duration of downtown? Reconnecting the landing into the rest of downtown and having the arch feel more like a park in downtown. That would be pretty awesome in my opinion.

Alex Ihnen · PostJan 16, 2013#1272013-01-16T19:39+00:00

^ The highway can't run underground because of the old rail, not MetroLink tunnel under Washington Avenue leading onto the Eads Bridge.

imran · PostJan 17, 2013#1282013-01-17T00:52+00:00

From CityArchRiver facebook page:

"On Tuesday, Jan. 8, the Great Rivers Greenway Board of Directors, as part of its mission to make the St. Louis region a better place to live, voted unanimously in favor of establishing the Safe & Accessible Arch Citizen's Committee, an advisory group of citizens that will provide input on the CityArchRiver 2015 project.

Great Rivers Greenway will lead the engagement process in cooperation with CityArchRiver 2015 Foundation and other project partners, including MoDOT, the City of St. Louis, the National Park Service and others. The 30-person committee will contain members from the entire St. Louis metropolitan region. Participants will give input on programs, activities, visitor experience, and the long-term preservation of the CityArchRiver 2015 project. The district hopes to begin an open call for participants by Wednesday, March 13, 2013."

An outspoken someone (or someones) from CitytoRiver needs to get on this committee!

Alex Ihnen · PostJan 17, 2013#1292013-01-17T05:23+00:00

Someone (or someones) from City to River will be applying. It will be interesting to see how it goes.

gary kreie · PostJan 19, 2013#1302013-01-19T04:57+00:00

Correct me if I am wrong (its just an expression) but won't there be a time in 2014 when the new MRB will be finished and open -- and the work on the pedestrian bridge to the Arch project will be at a stage that will require MODOT to shut down all traffic on the I-70 depressed lanes temporarily?

Then we will see the effects of eliminating the depressed lanes downtown. Will it be Carmageddon, or will life go on as usual?

ImprovSTL · PostJan 19, 2013#1312013-01-19T16:46+00:00

Just so I am clear, having the park over the highway doesn't mean the end of the blvd does it? Or at least the idea. Seems like they would supplement each other. I know price is a big sticking point here for both.

dredger · PostJan 20, 2013#1322013-01-20T12:42+00:00

ImprovSTL wrote:Just so I am clear, having the park over the highway doesn't mean the end of the blvd does it? Or at least the idea. Seems like they would supplement each other. I know price is a big sticking point here for both.

I really think the immideate concern is not the lid/park over the depressed lane but the plan or at least what understand is the plan for Washington Ave. If I got it correctly, Isn't MoDOT essentially proposing a Washington Ave freeway interchange/on and off ramps? (Can't help but take a cheap shot as it explains why all of suddent Drury Inn is interested in building at Wash Ave) I believe this would set back any idea of taking the raised section of I-70 down for another decade or two. Removing the raised section would be the easiest, cheapest way to get at least a good part of the blvd in place as well as offer the best chance of immediate developmeent as well as be a boost to any EDJ improvements/Lacledes landing

When it comes down to it, the lid and new western entrance to the Arch/expanded museum is happening. However, taking a big breath and pausing to explore the possibilities for the North end of the Arch grounds without a raised I-70 as well as what happens with EDJ/Bottlworks could still happen.

Alex Ihnen · PostJan 21, 2013#1332013-01-21T03:57+00:00

^FWIW - I don't think Drury is planning a signature hotel or anything on that parking lot next to the Eads/I-70. The only proposal I've seen if for a large parking garage with, perhaps, first level retail. If elevated I-70 were gone, there would be a whole lot more options.

geoffksu · PostJan 21, 2013#1342013-01-21T15:21+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:^FWIW - I don't think Drury is planning a signature hotel or anything on that parking lot next to the Eads/I-70. The only proposal I've seen if for a large parking garage with, perhaps, first level retail. If elevated I-70 were gone, there would be a whole lot more options.

During a meeting on the Third Street Streetscape improvements, Drury's Development Head (or whatever his title was) said that they were finalizing a proposal with help from The Lawrence Group to construct a residential building at the southwest corner of the large parking lot. After seeing the concepts that our firm had put together, Drury was even more excited about advancing their proposal. At that time they were getting the finances together to be sure that it made sense - this was back in November some time.

urban_dilettante · PostJan 21, 2013#1352013-01-21T18:04+00:00

^ !!!

roger wyoming II · PostJan 23, 2013#1362013-01-23T18:41+00:00

According to MODOT's response to a Road Crew question I submitted last week, look for work to begin in earnest on the I-70 project around late Summer, particularly beginning around north of Washington and then working its way south with time.

geoffksu · PostJan 24, 2013#1372013-01-24T14:43+00:00

roger wyoming II wrote:According to MODOT's response to a Road Crew question I submitted last week, look for work to begin in earnest on the I-70 project around late Summer, particularly beginning around north of Washington and then working its way south with time.

MoDOT's engineers, EFK Moen and others are now in the process of finalizing the construction documents for I-70 and the work from Washington north to Cass that includes the Third Street Streetscape.

MVVA has also been working on designs for enclosing the space under the elevated highway (from just south of Washington Ave to Cass Ave) with a complex lighting structure:

As well, they are designing a system of lighted bands to be hung underneath the bridge structure where Washington Ave crosses:

Separately, my firm has completed the design for the Third Street Streetscape:

Proposed festival space (currently North Third Street between Lucas and Tucker), Third Street and Memorial Drive will consolidate and be improved with a pedestrian-focused design - opposite of MoDOT's original 'Suburban Outer Road' design:

And, at night:

All of the stakeholders (business owners) we met with from the Landing and Drury were very excited to see the improvements to Third Street and were already thinking up ways to incorporate their business to use the space or move other events to this space in the future. Between this improvement to Third Street (face of the Landing) and the streetscape improvements to Second Street and First Street (construction to start anyday), the Landing will see nearly all of its streetscape infrastructure rehabilitated or reconstructed within the next few years (keeping its historical material context of course).

Kevin B · PostJan 24, 2013#1382013-01-24T15:17+00:00

^ That's a pretty neat design there, I have to admit. For it to succeed fully, the Drury lot needs to get halved and replaced at 3rd Street with new construction (not a parking garage), otherwise it's another dead zone up until you hit Morgan Street. Your previous post makes it sound like this is being considered, so that's good to hear!

I could see the Landing using this for busking, or for, as you said, festival space -- maybe a Big Muddy stage or the site of some of the Rivalry Rally activities. It'd still be better without the elevated lanes though, and I fear the MODoT is dead-set on keeping those regardless of public considerations. If they can do this, skip the new access ramps (and keep Washington Avenue open all the way to the river!), I'd give this portion of the project very high marks.

Well done.

geoffksu · PostJan 24, 2013#1392013-01-24T18:48+00:00

Kevin B wrote:I could see the Landing using this for busking, or for, as you said, festival space -- maybe a Big Muddy stage or the site of some of the Rivalry Rally activities. It'd still be better without the elevated lanes though, and I fear the MODoT is dead-set on keeping those regardless of public considerations. If they can do this, skip the new access ramps (and keep Washington Avenue open all the way to the river!), I'd give this portion of the project very high marks.

Well done.

I know its hard to see but there is a stage (3' high) at the end of the long festival space in front of the underutilized (and God-awful looking shell of a building) adjacent to and north of Nelly's production school.

The original vision saw Morgan Street expanding their offerings at the small pub room to the new outdoor space for a beer garden, brewery events, etc. and Nelly's place possibly using the stage for outdoor concerts or utilizing the entire Festival Space for a Big Muddy Blues type of event.

Thanks for the praise.

Kevin B · PostJan 24, 2013#1402013-01-24T19:29+00:00

geoffksu wrote:
Kevin B wrote:I could see the Landing using this for busking, or for, as you said, festival space -- maybe a Big Muddy stage or the site of some of the Rivalry Rally activities. It'd still be better without the elevated lanes though, and I fear the MODoT is dead-set on keeping those regardless of public considerations. If they can do this, skip the new access ramps (and keep Washington Avenue open all the way to the river!), I'd give this portion of the project very high marks.

Well done.
I know its hard to see but there is a stage (3' high) at the end of the long festival space in front of the underutilized (and God-awful looking shell of a building) adjacent to and north of Nelly's production school.

The original vision saw Morgan Street expanding their offerings at the small pub room to the new outdoor space for a beer garden, brewery events, etc. and Nelly's place possibly using the stage for outdoor concerts or utilizing the entire Festival Space for a Big Muddy Blues type of event.

Thanks for the praise.

You talking about this space along Collins Alley?

I'm actually fine with that building -- better than some "new construction" I have nightmares about. It just needs a higher purpose than the current tenant/owner has for it, and be, you know, connected to the City via Memorial Blvd.

There actually already is (was?) a 3-ft. stage on its back patio. We (well, they now...I don't work for the Laclede's Landing Merchants Assn. anymore) actually used it as a fourth stage location for Big Muddy Blues Festival back in 2010. I'm always wary of built-in festival stages, as they are so rarely used for their purpose. Rather, an adaptable pavilion with preferred space to construct a 10x20 as needed might be better.

Alex Ihnen · PostJan 24, 2013#1412013-01-24T20:00+00:00

I just think it was rally nice for all the people to come back at night and assume their same positions in order to give a real night v day comparison.

geoffksu · PostJan 24, 2013#1422013-01-24T23:04+00:00

Kevin B wrote:You talking about this space along Collins Alley?.

No, the space in front of that building, at the southeast corner of Memorial Drive and Laclede's Landing Boulevard.

See Image: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-S5JJ ... nceptC.jpg

Alex Ihnen wrote:I just think it was rally nice for all the people to come back at night and assume their same positions in order to give a real night v day comparison.

Always hassling me, geez...

gone corporate · PostJan 29, 2013#1432013-01-29T20:03+00:00

Reminder: The CAR Open House is this evening. 4-7PM. Old Courthouse.
Not that anything new is expected, just the same 3 choices of nothing, a little, and a little more (but no boulevard). Just watch out for the weather out there, as tonight could get choppy...
Source: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 31e0d.html

Alex Ihnen · PostJan 29, 2013#1442013-01-29T20:18+00:00

Two (trying to find the right word) quotes worth reading:

“We don’t plan in a bubble,” Honious said. “We want public input into the process.”

“This is an important process,” Hales said. “We don’t expect any big surprises.”

urban_dilettante · PostJan 29, 2013#1452013-01-29T21:49+00:00

^ contradictory?

Alex Ihnen · PostJan 29, 2013#1462013-01-29T22:16+00:00

IMO - the first is just misleading or disingenuous or something... I mean, sure, but the public doesn't have any real choices here. The NPS has let the park crumble and are basically asking if people want a bunch of money spent there. The second, well, what does that even mean? (again, it may reflect that there aren't really any choices left)

STLEnginerd · PostJan 29, 2013#1472013-01-29T22:53+00:00

Isn't this whole this sort of like trying to do touchups on the Mona Lisa. The Arch is modern architectural masterpiece and no one really wants it to be different anyway. The only people with the power to REALLY improve the Arch grounds is MODOT and they have already pretty much said no not interested since that would mean slowing down a few thousand cars a day so they might actually have to experience the city for once.

They don't need a trans-formative change to the improve the Arch. They have lost sight of the goal which was connecting the city to the arch and river. If they built the boulevard and did nothing else but refurbish and restore the original features that would be trans-formative to the city and the Arch. A west entrance is also needed only because our current post 911 security requirements make it necessary. That's it otherwise your airbrushing the Mona Lisa.

The garage is a minor issue and tearing it down WON'T solve the issues of Laclede's Landing which is half parking lot already let alone what might happen if you tear down the Arch garage especially if the Rams stay downtown. Big Parking must have STL by the balls cause as soon as a public garage is paid for its time to tear it down and build a new one somewhere else. If you really want a discovery garden put it on the south side and give people a reason to go over there.

Side note* I once met an architect from a st. louis firm and I asked him oh what projects he was involved in. Parking garages in Atlanta, and St. Louis. I was very polite.

Alex Ihnen · PostJan 29, 2013#1482013-01-29T23:07+00:00

^ Yeah. Only correction - MoDOT has provided most of the funding to this point (that's how you get heard). And while they're certainly skeptical of I-70 -> boulevard, it's the city that's the hang-up and its allegiance to CityArchRiver - a group that thinks what ails the Arch is crossing one street too many.

STLEnginerd · PostJan 29, 2013#1492013-01-29T23:12+00:00

Thanks I am now better informed

dredger · PostJan 30, 2013#1502013-01-30T05:26+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:^ Yeah. Only correction - MoDOT has provided most of the funding to this point (that's how you get heard). And while they're certainly skeptical of I-70 -> boulevard, it's the city that's the hang-up and its allegiance to CityArchRiver - a group that thinks what ails the Arch is crossing one street too many.

I think you pretty much state what is missing in this whole conversion, a position from the city political leadership that challenges the status quo. Instead of proposing changes that other communities get. The city seems content to let CityArchRiver dictate and therefore MoDOT has no political leadership challenging the status quo. At least converting the raised section of I-70 to a blvd would be a minimal impact and provide huge opportunities going forward for the city in terms of EDJ/CVC/RAMS, Bottleworks, and Laclede's Landing.

CityArchRiver

Choose Display Mode