Jefferson Arms Apartments - 415 North Tucker Blvd

Renovations and new residential construction in downtown St. Louis, Washington Avenue, the Old Post Office, etc.
First unread post269 posts
^ 100% agreed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've been saying for years that Tucker would be a perfect spot for a protected two way bike lane that runs all the way to Gravois. That connection to south city has always been terrible for bikers. There is definitely plenty of room.

Image
bwcrow1s wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:23 am
Looking great!

Still would be a breath of fresh air to give tucker a road diet. I was driving on it yesterday and I think I counted 4-5 lanes soutbound. Absolutely ridiculous.
Working downtown and living in south city, Tucker needs to maintain is size, it carries LOT of traffic, and now connects with the new I-70. The reduction in lanes south of Chouteau has caused an increase in my commute.

The only through roads N-S are: 1) 4th / Broadway, 2) Tucker, 3)14th and 4) Jefferson. 4 options for getting through downtown is not a lot

Now if we could just get a sign up where Tucker goes under 40 / 64 that states well in advance the right lane is a right turn only at Chouteau!
^And 18th Street. So in other words 1 through street every 5 blocks which seems like pretty good coverage.

In any event the whole point of a road diet would be to increase your commute, and by doing so make the streetscape and pedestrian experience more appealing.
As someone who used to drive down Tucker to get to I-44/Lafayette daily, I can say that rush hour traffic exists for a reason and it's not that bad on Tucker. I've been living downtown carless for 2 years now. Tucker is a huge dividing line that discourages residents and workers on one side from visiting businesses on the other. I agree that the lack of viaducts south of downtown is a problem but there's not really anything we can do to fix it. Letting our CBD get cut two blocks short by a 120' wide ROW is unnecessary and will compromise any retail that goes into Jefferson Arms.
wabash wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:40 pm
In any event the whole point of a road diet would be to increase your commute, and by doing so make the streetscape and pedestrian experience more appealing.
This is one of the biggest struggles we have in St. Louis. We've built such a commuters haven in this region that anything that runs counter to that feels like a huge deal and a negative to drivers.

In reality, most cities of an enviable liveliness and size have long commutes and traffic because making the efficiency of moving car traffic secondary to instability for pedestrian traffic is what leads to a lively city.

Tucker could definitely stand to lose a lane in each direction.
A big problem in downtown and in general St. Louis. The roads are built to get people in and out and not for the people who have to live there.
GoHarvOrGoHome wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:03 pm
I've been saying for years that Tucker would be a perfect spot for a protected two way bike lane that runs all the way to Gravois. That connection to south city has always been terrible for bikers. There is definitely plenty of room.

Image
I like this idea. Tucker moves a lot of traffic but it all bottlenecks at Washington going north anyway. You might as well reduce the entire thing south of Washington so it flows better all the way thru.
.
addxb2 wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:27 pm
A big problem in downtown and in general St. Louis. The roads are built to get people in and out and not for the people who have to live there.
Yup. I think it goes beyond roads even. Built for people to pass through and visit but not live and work.
chriss752 wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:48 am
This looks like something that would be done in New York or Chicago. I like it.

Image
Image
Thank you.

Mike Sarimsakci
aprice wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:07 am
Is that AC Hotels (Marriott) logo new info to anyone else? Last I heard it was just going to be a Marriott.
AC is a Marriott brand. We have mentioned Jefferson Arms project would be a Marriott AC product. Mix use, 220 hotel rooms + 240 residential units, plus some retail and collaborative office component.

Thank you.
addxb2 wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:27 pm
A big problem in downtown and in general St. Louis. The roads are built to get people in and out and not for the people who have to live there.
I agree with your observation. Furthermore, many roads were built when City of St. Louis had 900,000 residents. Now it has only 300,000. It is a problem.

Mike Sarimsakci
GoHarvOrGoHome wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:03 pm
I've been saying for years that Tucker would be a perfect spot for a protected two way bike lane that runs all the way to Gravois. That connection to south city has always been terrible for bikers. There is definitely plenty of room.

Image
This looks great.
jstriebel wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:45 pm
wabash wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:40 pm
In any event the whole point of a road diet would be to increase your commute, and by doing so make the streetscape and pedestrian experience more appealing.
This is one of the biggest struggles we have in St. Louis. We've built such a commuters haven in this region that anything that runs counter to that feels like a huge deal and a negative to drivers.

In reality, most cities of an enviable liveliness and size have long commutes and traffic because making the efficiency of moving car traffic secondary to instability for pedestrian traffic is what leads to a lively city.

Tucker could definitely stand to lose a lane in each direction.
I agree. If St Louis residents would like to see a vibrant, walkable, livable city some sacrifices needs to be made. These decisions needs to be spearheaded by the St Louis residents. Having said that I think more bike lanes is a must, especially on Tucker.
^ Can you tell that to our mayor and board of aldermen? You might be the first businessman ever to suggest such a thing in St. Louis! :D
Interesting discussion. I think one way to look at it or from a different view point is that the streets were not built to accommodate people coming and going out of the city. That is truly a discussion for the freeways as its what 4-6 blocks to get to a freeway at most and a rebuilt 22nd street will give a full interchange for Jefferson/West downtown.

The reality is that the streets for the most part were there as is when the city had a much bigger population of people living and working within the city decades ago. Instead, my perspective is that the streets were built to accommodate multimodal transportation that included an extensive streetcar system among automobiles, pedestrians and cyclists when transportation costs took a much higher percentage of income out of folks pockets. For the city, asphalt had been a cheap replacement when the streetcar went away. So their is precedence for city leaders embracing the streets beyond an automobile as being discussed and the city would benefit much more from that mentality of a truly intermodal approach to its streets & being an urban environment for the region.
I believe Tucker at some point in the past had a market in the center which is one of the reasons it is so wide.
southcitygent wrote:
Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:23 am
I believe Tucker at some point in the past had a market in the center which is one of the reasons it is so wide.
Interesting - I had no idea. Seems that it was called Lucas Market (STL Today post http://bit.ly/2iTHdqr) Mentioned as being at Tucker and Olive, all the way back in 1870.

Image