urbanSTL

STLgasm, you said it better than I, especially your last sentance. And thanks stlmike for posting those great pics.

Marmar wrote:IOW, they shouldn't have changed the function of this street.

What, exactly, has the function of 4100-4200 Olive St been the last 35+ years? I might agree that Olive should be "lined with business and restaurants" if it were located much closer to a Metrolink stop or transportation hub. But I don't believe that Olive can sustain this number of businesses, given the current amount of pedestrian and auto traffic. In fact, two businesses have closed this past year (Dove Cafe and Isoke, a clothing boutique). IMO, GS needs more people, and I think is moving in the right direction. I'm glad that 300-400+ people will be living in these two blocks, and I think businesses will follow.

Yes, there are a couple (literally) attractive homes, but lacking are the few steps up from the sidewalk, where the earth is mounded up, making the homes sit tall and prould. In GLS, the homes sit on the same level as the street, very untypical for this (and most) areas of the city and gives it a suburban-y look.

Yes, homes in GS do not have the same elevation as in many other neighborhoods in the city. I can see how you might find this atypical, but suburban? Are you suggesting that if a home isn't sitting "tall and proud" that it's automatically suburban? I'd like to hear some additional specifics you use when classifying a neighborhood as "suburban-y".

Marmar wrote:A development to draw (uninitiated to city life) suburbanites to the city (something that should never be done)

I agree that we shouldn't start building subdivisions in the middle of our city. I think I've mentioned this before, but I've met more people in GS that have relocated from other areas in the city, than I have "uninitiated suburbanites".

Marmar wrote:built by developers who have no clue as to the function of a city street grid and have no concept of urban design.

Are you saying the lack of businesses is interfering with the street grid? If you're referring to the barricades, they weren't part of any developer's plan - their placement was decided by Alderman Kennedy.

Marmar wrote:Again, I must offer apologies if I have offended you or anyone else.

You haven't offended me. I'd just like to hear some more specifics.

I admit I'm a bit dissappointed with some of the direction Gaslight Square has taken, but come on...it's not that bad!



No, this new development won't make the cover of any architecture magazines, but I don't see how anyone can call it "suburban". These are attached townhouses, on a densely built-up street, with alley-access garages, etc. The "Victoria" model is really quite stunning.



All those "sold" signs on Olive look mighty good to me, and it's great to see the development spreading to the rest of the neighborhood.

The city is gaining population for the first time in half a century. Sure, the function of Olive has changed in that time, due to neglect and thanks to those who high-tailed it to the suburbs. My question on this one is, what happens when the density returns to these areas? Surely, Olive will again become a well traveled street...unless they close it off.

As for the architecture, mimicking older architecture, especially in this area built by some degree of wealth, is hard to do successfully without great cost, so really, what is the point of infill if the infill does not meet those standards? When I say suburban-y (definately not a word, sorry!), I mean that the architecture seems typical of those 'new urban' spaces in some suburban developments (no, I'm not referring to New Town). Drive through St. Charles and West County, and you can see precisely the same kind of architecture in some of the newer developments. Many seem to try to mimic aspects of older city 'nabes. That's what I mean by "suburban-y". (I must add, I'm a lover of architecure, and I tend to notice things the average person might not.)

So now my question on this subject is, why didn't developers opt for a more urban, modern archtecture instead of a step back? Olive had started toward a more urban/business steetscape at some point, and now developers have switched GS to a more-or-less residential street.

I don't know, Zezuz, you and I just disagree on this, and I can understand your point, but simply don't agree. I don't think you understand what I am trying to convey, but I think one of the key ellements is understanding urban architecture and it's relationship to it's setting, function and the street.

^ Is it just me, or does the pic above look a lot like Metro Lofts on FPP?



I too would have liked to see something more cutting edge and interesting in GLS, but the longer I'm in St. Louis the more I realize that the 'customers' for just about everything are suburbanites. I can't say I blame developers in this sense. Looking at potential buyers for $300,000 homes, the majority seem to be in west county or beyond so you want to make your development attractive to them. Basically, I don't doubt that marketing to surbanites seems like a safer bet.

I think we are going to see some more interesting designs - aren't the proposed lofts on Delmar supposed to be a little more modern/interesting?

I certainly hope you're right about that, DeB.

What ever happened to that city planner (?), the guy from Toronto (?) that the city hired? Seems like he could have prevented some of the junk that's been recently built or planned. Did he leave, or what? I can't recall the man's name, but if he's still here he sure ain't doing his job.

You're thinking of Rollin Stanley. Not sure what he's been involved in lately.

Marmar wrote:Sure, the function of Olive has changed in that time, due to neglect and thanks to those who high-tailed it to the suburbs. My question on this one is, what happens when the density returns to these areas? Surely, Olive will again become a well traveled street...unless they close it off.

So should Olive St have been lined with new storefronts that would potentially sit vacant for many years until we have adequate density to support them? Even if a few new office towers are constructed downtown or Grand Center, do you think enough people would use Olive as a thoroughfare to support streets lined with businesses? As much as I would like to see more businesses in the neighborhood, I just don't buy your argument.



I think the retail in the Selkirk building will be a great start for GS. If these businesses succeed, then hopefully first-floor retail will be incorporated into future developments.

Marmar wrote:I think one of the key ellements is understanding urban architecture and it's relationship to it's setting, function and the street.

I agree. And I think the developers have done a fine job of understanding this relationship. Specifically, I think the developers did a good job making the area urban (densely populated, alley-access garages, etc.), while still allowing residences to have yards, garages, etc.

Yes...thank you, DeB. Is he in fact city planner? (Although, I'm not at all sure what all that would include...certainly seems like he'd have some say so over some of the stuff going on. Moreso, I would think there would be more than one city planner at city hall.)

Note: When I referred to some of the junk that has been built or is planned, I was not referring to GS or the plans posted. I don't think these are junk. Inappropriate, yes...junk, no.

Marmar wrote:^^OH, yes, Zezuz, storefronts allllllllllll the way down Olive. No single family homes...better yet, NO housing...just offices, businesses and restaurants...cuz we all know that the population of the West End will be three million by this time next year and downtown will have at least 50 buildings over a hundred stories, and everyone will want to drive down Olive to get home. And everything should be so modern and cutting edge, you'd feel like you fell through a mirror! Yes!! Sharp agnles (to cut up the suburbanites)

Now, how's that? Is that what you wanted to see? Well, that ain't exactly what I meant, but hopefully it will quell your questions.

I'm just using your words - you're the one who said Olive should be "lined with storefronts and businesses". It's unfortunate that you can't seem to handle it when someone disagrees with you. If you're so desparate for change, then why don't you make some specific suggestions or give examples of (like STLGasms rendering below) how GS and surrounding neighborhoods can be improved in the future, rather than go on silly rants or make negative blanket statements.

Zezuz, you've read my posts, you see that I've given my opinion. This is a forum, not a charette. Opinions and discussion is what this forum is about. I've given mine. I've tried not to insult or hurt anyones feelings, and if I have I'm ignorant to that fact, and I apologize. But I'm honest in my opinions. Really, need I apologize for that? Apparently, you have taken great offense at my opinions, especially judging by your last post even though I had already appologized to you/anyone, if I recall correctly. I feel I was being fair, honest and not insulting to anyone. (If anyone feels differently, please inform me.) The main thing is that we get along and respect one another. Difference of opinion is one thing, attacking one's character is another.

I thought I'd inject a little humor into the situation, since it seems we're hopelessly at odds on the subject of GS. Sometimes, humor is a good peace maker. I'm sorry it backfired...(not an apology to you, but to others who may have been following).

Now, with that, (and I don't like saying this in a forum) I'll kindly refrain from answering any posts you make and trust you will do the same with reguards to me. Thank you.

Moderator if you feel the need than lock this thread



As a reader and poster this bickering has continued for too long with great repetition. Let's not forget than nothing remains the same in a city over time. Olive, once being a commercial street, has become residential while an auto/industrial street like Lindell for a stretch may revert to commercial or Delmar may change from residential to commercial. This is of course in the GS area.



If there are 300 residents in two blocks than I rather hear about how residents are getting along and forming community, that advertised city character attrivute we supposedly trumpet and pride ourselves on. Have there been any block parties, pumpkin carving contests, etc like what Old North St. Louis or Tower Grove East neighborhoods would do to bring people together for fun?

Marmar wrote:Zezuz, you've read my posts, you see that I've given my opinion. This is a forum, not a charette. Opinions and discussion is what this forum is about. I've given mine. I've tried not to insult or hurt anyones feelings, and if I have I'm ignorant to that fact, and I apologize. But I'm honest in my opinions. Really, need I apologize for that? Apparently, you have taken great offense at my opinions, especially judging by your last post even though I had already appologized to you/anyone, if I recall correctly. I feel I was being fair, honest and not insulting to anyone. (If anyone feels differently, please inform me.) The main thing is that we get along and respect one another. Difference of opinion is one thing, attacking one's character is another.

I thought I'd inject a little humor into the situation, since it seems we're hopelessly at odds on the subject of GS. Sometimes, humor is a good peace maker. I'm sorry it backfired...(not an apology to you, but to others who may have been following).

Now, with that, (and I don't like saying this in a forum) I'll kindly refrain from answering any posts you make and trust you will do the same with reguards to me. Thank you.

I'm not offended by your opinions, and I never asked for an apology. I simply asked you for specifics. The design of GS is far from perfect, and we can't learn from the mistakes made if we just say things like it's too "suburban". It just seems pointless to me to spread baseless negativity on an existing neighborhood.

Thank you, SMSPlanstu, I'm in total agreement. I think it would be a good idea for the moderator to lock the topic at this point.

No need to lock it as long as we can get back to the original topic, and not just bicker back and forth. Like was stated, a forum doesn't work with one idea alone, but it also doesn't work just by arguing over little things.

as a resident of Gaslight, i agree, some of the architechture sucks but some of it is great. the mere fact that people are living on this street now compared to what it was five years ago is a testament to the revitalization of the city. there are plenty of streets we can line with businesses (Sarah for example). I think we need to celebrate the success of GLS rather than complain about the architechture.

Well, I agree with that. I must say I was very impressed by the craftsmanship of a couple of the houses. Overall, and I know I've been very critical, (perhaps too critical...some things really are better left unsaid and as I look back on some of my posts, I was a little too nit-picky). So, I'll tell you the things I think are posative about GS.



1. People moving back into the neighborhood.

2. The developments appeal to higher income people.

3. In function, it is an urban neighborhood.

4. Despite my dislike of some of the architecture, it looks high quality.

5. The negative points are not as important as the posative points.



I guess some of the GS people would love to choke me(!), and are probably shocked that I said something posative(!!). But believe it or not, I can only say I hope the best for GS and those who have chosen to invest in the neighborhood (and I in fact did say something quite similar to this several months ago.)

The barriers have been moved!!!



They now form a roundabout on Olive & Whitter.

Marmar wrote:Well, I agree with that. I must say I was very impressed by the craftsmanship of a couple of the houses. Overall, and I know I've been very critical, (perhaps too critical...some things really are better left unsaid and as I look back on some of my posts, I was a little too nit-picky). So, I'll tell you the things I think are posative about GS....

Marmar, although I'd agree with you that some of the new GS architecture isn't perfect, I think most would agree that it's pretty good. It is certainly better than your average (or even upscale) suburban architecture. For that it should be commended.

Zezuz wrote:The barriers have been moved!!!



They now form a roundabout on Olive & Whitter.

I'm not falling for it again. Weren't they moved once before recently, just to be put back in place blocking off the whole street?

Framer wrote:I'm not falling for it again. Weren't they moved once before recently, just to be put back in place blocking off the whole street?

Yes, a few weeks ago, one of the four barriers was moved ~5-10 feet outward from the others - there was just enough space for one car to squeeze through.



But now they're in the shape of a roundabout as discussed with the Alderman. I think this time it's permanent.