Landing Development

The design competition and remake of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial, AKA the Arch grounds.
First unread post211 posts
This seems like a no-brainer and the very least that we can do. I just think it's lame that we have to but a street back from a hotel chain that is just sitting on it for parking.
Any thoughts if the MLK bridge is even worth having in place anymore? Thinking that you could re route the IL side ramps to the Eads bridge and take down the MLK bridge. At least give the Laclede's Landing/north riverside a more continuous perception for future development and make the street grid more focused even though you would still need to go under the raised freeway? In addition, it seems like you would have more continuous block on IL side to develop as well.

Not exactly cheap, but some salvageable steel and you can always leave the piers for a future downsized pedestrian/trail crossing in the future.
It's outdated, and not really aesthetically pleasing for sure. Also, I don't see that much traffic on it, at least from my experience.

I think it would be easier if the MacArthur road deck had been redone instead of scrapped and it would retain another avenue across the river. Especially when that bridge really doesn't disrupt any development opportunities, and now we also have the Stan Span

At this point, though, I fear that any plan to do that near Downtown is far past. And be far too costly, especially if you want to be able to offer a 55/44 to 64 interchange to go west.
^cant really condone tearing down a cross river connection. Maybe a colorful paint job would make it more enduring in the hearts of the public. Similar to how the purple people eater in Cincy and the yellow bridge in Pittsburg are instantly recognizable.

I was debating a color when I thought why not all of them. A prismatic rainbow color scheme would be very eye catching and be both an homage to MLKs rainbow coalition, and a symbol of St. Louis as a welcoming city for the LGBT community.
My thoughts were along the lines of what significant change you could make beyond removing the raised section of freeway that would garner political support or at least not garner significant opposition. Extending Lucas drive seems like a logical choice but not really bringing a significant or noticeable change so my thought turned to a bridge in all reality is obsolete considering Stan Span was added and a significant dollars, lane addition to Poplar street bridge is probably more then adequate for decades to come.

Remove MLK and the perception of a physical barrier between Laclede's Landing & North Broadway/North Riverfront area that also has ties in better to near north side/bottle work site. Keeping the river foundations in place is a money saver and leaves the possibility for future ideas, uses. Heck, I would float the idea for budgetary cost if I was MoDOT/ILDOT just to compare against future costs for maintaining the existing structure as is.
St Louis Biz Journals with write up/summary of Laclede Landing development. A note/sentence given on how poor city planning has led to area being choked off from rest of downtown/Arch grounds. References talks to extend Lucas Ave into Laclede's and small Drury project.

https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... llion.html
Nice writeup.
Great Rivers Greenway also is redeveloping a half-acre garden on the riverfront, north of Eads Bridge and the Arch, that will be completed this fall.
Here is the referenced park: https://greatriversgreenway.org/great-r ... want-hear/. I had never heard of this. But I'm not sure if I'm a fan of it. This basically ensures that the lot immediately east of the park will never be developed. Would make much more sense to build this in the lot immediately abutting LKS. Perhaps it's the elevation, though.

Let's keep all the parking structures and lots, though. I wish Drury would get the ball rolling in replacing one of these with the garage + residential.
bwcrow1s wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 7:50 am
Nice writeup.
Great Rivers Greenway also is redeveloping a half-acre garden on the riverfront, north of Eads Bridge and the Arch, that will be completed this fall.
Here is the referenced park: https://greatriversgreenway.org/great-r ... want-hear/. I had never heard of this. But I'm not sure if I'm a fan of it. This basically ensures that the lot immediately east of the park will never be developed. Would make much more sense to build this in the lot immediately abutting LKS. Perhaps it's the elevation, though.

Let's keep all the parking structures and lots, though. I wish Drury would get the ball rolling in replacing one of these with the garage + residential.
Yeah, not a fan of this.
I believe that survey came out last year. I agree. Its a poor use of space. A plaza is pretty redundant to the grass amphitheater that they just replaced the Arch garage with. I don't see it getting a lot of use.
dredger wrote:
Wed May 30, 2018 5:32 pm
St Louis Biz Journals with write up/summary of Laclede Landing development. A note/sentence given on how poor city planning has led to area being choked off from rest of downtown/Arch grounds. References talks to extend Lucas Ave into Laclede's and small Drury project.

https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... llion.html
I wouldn't call it big, but the Drury project renovating the Witte bringing 50.000 square feet of new office and a new restaurant (in old Hannegan's spot) isn't exactly small either.
^ True, thinking relatively to Drury looking at a new residential high rise/hotel tower & parking structure. Still got fingers and toes crossed on that one. Maybe its inching closer to reality now that Drury realizes that anything they can do to improve access to Landing is a big plus for them as well.
pat wrote: I believe that survey came out last year. I agree. Its a poor use of space. A plaza is pretty redundant to the grass amphitheater that they just replaced the Arch garage with. I don't see it getting a lot of use.
Yep, talk about a great location for residential infill if GRG would sell off the property and get rid of the redundant green space. GRG should worry more about trail improvements.

Instead, I believe an urban beach for the Landing as posted on previous threads would be awesome (believe an urban beach in Paris was one of the posts). It would be an unique amenity for Landing & Wash Ave residents. I think the city owns the linear surface parking lot closest to the river and has rail trestle running parallel with it.
bwcrow1s wrote:
Thu May 31, 2018 7:50 am
Nice writeup.
Great Rivers Greenway also is redeveloping a half-acre garden on the riverfront, north of Eads Bridge and the Arch, that will be completed this fall.
Here is the referenced park: https://greatriversgreenway.org/great-r ... want-hear/. I had never heard of this. But I'm not sure if I'm a fan of it. This basically ensures that the lot immediately east of the park will never be developed. Would make much more sense to build this in the lot immediately abutting LKS. Perhaps it's the elevation, though.

Let's keep all the parking structures and lots, though. I wish Drury would get the ball rolling in replacing one of these with the garage + residential.
Is this actually happening? What a waste. I get why it makes sense to convert the blocks east of commercial street as those lots regularly flood when the river is high. This lot however should be a building with awesome views of the Eads, and of the river. If they started with the block east of commercial they might actually find there is a commercial interest in this lot instead of putting it in the public domain in perpetuity.

I vaguely recall that survey and seem to remember a bunch of questions that did not at any point whether this lot should even become a park in the first place.
Actually, this seems to make sense to me. It looks like the first phase of their planned Riverfront Park, which will be built on flood-prone land.

Image

Image

Image

Image
Yes, but didn't they raised LKS a couiple of feet? Shouldn't that help with some of the flooding? Or was that just between Eads and PSB?

I still contend that they could put this right up on LKS, on the lot abutting it on the west side. Hope for development in the lot west. Convert that eyesore parking garage into something more productive, useful, and inviting. It will retain a feasible three contiguious lots for possible redevelopment in the future instead of breaking apart and isolating the lot nearest to the trestle/river.

I sent them a long winded email about this about a week ago, never heard back.
framer wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:42 pm
Actually, this seems to make sense to me. It looks like the first phase of their planned Riverfront Park, which will be built on flood-prone land.

Image
If the lot in question was one of the ones underwater in this picture then i would agree. The lot they are talking about is on the west side of Commercial street and south of locust. It should be a building.

The garage can go for all i care but the landing does need a parking facility. I tend to think the surface lot between Morgan street and MLK makes the most sense.
^ Exactly. I'd rather a concrete public park fall victim to flood waters. And again, didn't LKS get raised here as well? It shouldn't be that large of an issue any longer if so.

This just isolates that lot and ruins any possible future development for it for yet another park. There are so many opportunities to build another park on the Landing or near it. I mean, seriously.. you have a 40 square block park just on the other side of the bridge.

They still haven't responded to my query on the park.
STLEnginerd wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:47 pm
framer wrote:
Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:42 pm
Actually, this seems to make sense to me. It looks like the first phase of their planned Riverfront Park, which will be built on flood-prone land.

Image
If the lot in question was one of the ones underwater in this picture then i would agree. The lot they are talking about is on the west side of Commercial street and south of locust. It should be a building.

The garage can go for all i care but the landing does need a parking facility. I tend to think the surface lot between Morgan street and MLK makes the most sense.
That should be Lucas... it's the unfortunate vacant lot adjacent to the Eads and in the photo is the one of the three vacant lots that is in the upper left (and more elevated than the vacant lot closer to the river across from the garage.) It was the site of the old Switzer Building that unfortunately came crashing down during a tornado while under rehab for multi-family in 2007. So I think new development clearly is possible. (And according to records, it looks like there were buildings on the vacant lot closer to the river as recently as the1990s.)
The building on the lot immediately behind the elevated line and next to the bridge was a TRRA commuter station that I believe even served both the Eads Line and the High Line. (Could have served the wharf line as well, but I doubt there was ever commuter service there.) Best as I can tell it was gone by the mid eighties. Google Earth doesn't show it in 1988. I seem to recall it was there into the early 80s, though I'm not certain of it. But even by then it had been long closed and the lower level was probably pretty disposable anyway.

Raising Lenore Sullivan would be, at very best, a mixed blessing. All the new levies and raised construction just push the flooding higher. So maybe LKS will only flood about every ten years or so, same as it always did. (Note: it has already flooded at least once since it was rebuilt. That I'm aware of. And it hasn't been rebuilt all that long.)

That said, I would very much have liked to see something better than a park on the site of the Switzler building. And the TRRA depot.
These flood prone spots would be a good place for a riverfront bar elevated on piers.
I think the parking garage is a good candidate for a retrofitting. It has all the bones to be an open air bar and/or restaurant with a roof deck, windowed garage doors for the winter. Views of the river. A biergarten.

I'm just blabbering at this point, because I'm not a developer and the city owns the garage. But it could be utilized so much better. Just wish we had more people with money, balls and vision to turn around so many of these prime locations.
^ the garage is owned by Saint Louis Parking, which also owns the surface lot adjacent to the Eads.

That lot lost out to Drury on the bid to build a mixed-use replacement garage, which of course never happened anyway. But I definitely want to see that lot built upon.... the garage needs a re-visioning for the future but I'd rather have STL Parking focus on the surface lot first.
SO just to be clear...

612 N 1st is not flooded in the picture and is the one designated for an amphitheatre. This is a terrible idea IMHO. It should be a mixed use building.

700 N 1st and 613 N 1st are also prime spots for mixed use.

the garage at 701 N LKS Blvd I am indifferent too but it should be replaced when a new mixed use garage is built. The drury proposal was at 702 Lumiere Place but if they keep dragging there feet i think it is reasonable to punt and build it at 801 N 1st on the surface lot.

Everything between Commercial and LKS it seems reasonable to add to GRG.

also St. Louis Parking seems to run all the lot you identified but it looks like the garage and the two surface lots are all owned by separate entities.
Nice write up, summary of landing in the PD but test of time will be new infill and whether Drury family will pull trigger or continue land banking in the city.

https://www.stltoday.com/business/local ... 92403.html

His company is in the midst of renovating the structure, Metro transit operator Bi-State Development’s former headquarters, into 49 apartments set to open by the end of the year. The lower levels will also house offices for Abstrakt Marketing, which plans to expand from its current offices next door at Raeder Place. Abstrakt is growing to about 300 people with the addition of about 100 jobs.

Between the Arch grounds and the views of the Mississippi River and downtown St. Louis, “it’s just a matter of time before it all fills in down there,” Minges said. He’s happy other apartment developers are coming in close behind Advantes.
I hadn't heard of those other apartment projects! That's awesome!

I still just really can't wait for that park to be put in so we have a patch of un-develop-able grass for no reason. Just shimmy the park a bit East FFS. That is, if they're still going for the "unobstructed views" of the river, trestle and bridge. If they would still be open to developing east of it, then it could be a cool pocket park. But their current mission makes little to no sense if it doesn't go all the way to LKS.
GRG is apparently hold an open house about Laclede's Landing on Wedensday. Sounds like an opportunity to find out more about development on Laclede’s Landing and ask why another park and amphitheater are being located at the pedestrian entrance to Laclede’s Landing- a location which begs for commercial development rather than another park a couple hundred feet from a pretty well-known 40 acre park and amphitheater

https://greatriversgreenway.org/open-ho ... ake-shape/