urbanSTL

Well, say the specifics are that this connector looks a lot like River De Peres and sits right next to your house. Would you want that there? I doubt it.

The only benefit of this I see is that people who don't live right next to it can go from their house to the highway a few minutes faster than it normally takes them. And they can take two roads instead of three or four.

Look at River De Peres Blvd right now. What is there? Green space for the most part. Isn't the area for the connector better served right now with businesses and people that live there? This connector would eliminate a lot of that to ease the commute for people that don't even live by it. I don't see the net benefit.

^ Highways made Chesterfield AWESOME.

Alex Ihnen wrote:Can anyone name a highway that made the area near it better? And by better I don't be new gas stations.

I was just wondering what property values look like in Chicago, as it doesn't take a scientist to note that area immediately next to the interstates suffers while development in very prevalent butted up next to the L. Sq ft cost of interstate "TOD" and light rail/Streetcar/Subway/L TOD

Alex Ihnen wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote:Why would anyone want to live near transit if they have never had a good transit experience?

The point is that a first experience needs to be good. Even a "good park-and-ride" experience" isn't good. How is a park-and-raid experience going to make someone think, "This is it, I want to live next to this parking garage where there's no street life, little to no retail, and I can't walk to anything."? When someone visits a friend, takes transit to a festival, etc. - that experience should be walkable - there should be things to do - not a park-and-ride.

At least wherever they're going is likely to be walkable. That's half of the equation.

There is a single public meeting scheduled for the South County Connector Environmental Impact Statement on May 30th, at Shrewsbury Center, 5200 Shrewsbury Ave. 4 to 8pm. I'd really encourage people to attend and comment. http://www.southcountyconnector.com/

This is your one chance to officially comment on the EIS. You can also submit comments online. Approval of the EIS is THE FINAL stage before St. Louis County can seek federal funding to build this roadway. I've read the entire 700+ page EIS and here is my summary:

- The road is not in South County
- Approximately one mile of the two mile stretch will be elevated.
- Noise will increase in all adjacent neighborhoods and parks.
- A good portion of the road is in a St. Louis City Park
- The road destroys both the River Des Peres Trail and the Deer Creek Trail
- The road goes over the Shrewsbury Metrolink parking lot and will dramatically undermine ridership from this station
- Proposed intersections include up to 9 LANES, including double free turn right lanes, typical in High Capacity interstate interchanges
- The road includes a full interchange with I-44, Which IS NOT SHOWN GRAPHICALLY in the EIS maps
- According to the EIS, the road will necessitate widening of Hanley Rd.
- The road is based on completely faulty assumptions on traffic growth from some guessing done in 2003 - all the guesses have proven to be wrong over the last decade.
- This is a line in the sand folks. City or County residents, get involved to stop this. Not building it is still an option.

Scott Ogilvie
24th Ward Alderman

shadrach wrote:Scott's description is more intensive than I envisioned from reading the materials.

Admittedly, I'm a little on the fence.

First, living in the area, I have always found RDP pkwy/Ellendale/McCausland and RDP pkwy/Landsdowne/Big Bend/Key West cluster more complicated, cumbersome and janky. (Current situation a result of two railroads, two drainage canals, an Interstate and converging street grid patterns)

I'm one who like to see all that sorted out, smoothed out, untangled and wondered why it took so long to address the infrastructure insanity. So I was quietly supporting this.

I'm for a solution, but not sure all the elevated ramps, flyovers and interchange are the solution. Interested in seeing the plans.

Agree with every word here - well said.

-RBB

^ In response to the above:

St. Louis County (and City) are already chopped up by over-sized roads and interstates. Start at any point in the City or County on a bike and try to go 5 miles in any direction without crossing a road that makes you feel extremely uncomfortable. For pedestrians, the situation is even more dire. True livability comes with being able to get around by car, yes, but also comfortably on foot and by bike, etc. We shouldn't be building any new roadways without maximum consideration for pedestrians and cyclists, as well as placemaking and beautification. This project, however, is a plain old, limited access, high speed, pedestrian-hostile chunk of unadorned concrete, as proposed (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

It's clear to me this South County Connector idea should have been discussed / planned for the mid-1970s, when I-44 was completed. Not now. The study area is already built out and the surrounding communities have already suffered through the noise, traffic, and barriers to accessibility that an interstate brings. We shouldn't be adding another interstate-grade road to this area.

Further, the neighborhoods adjacent to the proposed roadway aren't growing in population and are stagnant at best in job growth. Valuing an idealized road network over bike trails, parks, TOD opportunities, and general walkability and aesthetics is not a smart prioritization, IMO. Like I said--sounds like the 1970s!

And then there is the insane notion that one jurisdiction would use the land of another to accomplish its transportation / connectivity goals. I don't want a Highway 141 on the edge of my city. I don't want it anywhere near the city, really--but at the very least I should be able to say that the County can't put a new, gigantic unnecessary road in the City in which I live if I have no representation in the County.

(EDIT: Also, am I crazy, or is Laclede Station Road / Hanley not the current South County Connector? It can get you from Gravois in South County to Clayton with at least four lanes of traffic. It seems with better signal timing at key intersections (like Watson as it crosses Laclede Station), a lot of project goals could be accomplished at a minimal cost.)

I use Hanley/Laclede station for my commute most days. At 5pm it is mostly bumper to bumper southbound from downtown Clayton to 44/Murdock.
The largest backups are from 40 north back FPP, Manchester north back to Walmart/Lowes, and from Big Bend down the hill to Deer Creek. Luckily I have a reverse commute.

roger wyoming II wrote:

moorlander wrote:I use Hanley/Laclede station for my commute most days. At 5pm it is mostly bumper to bumper southbound from downtown Clayton to 44/Murdock.
The largest backups are from 40 north back FPP, Manchester north back to Walmart/Lowes, and from Big Bend down the hill to Deer Creek. Luckily I have a reverse commute.

Just think how bad things will be on Hanley if this gets done. And the County wants it that way so they can move on to Phase II.

Maybe congenstion could be releaved by educating commuters on real-time commute times via Brentwood, Hanley, Big Bend, and McCausland. That and working on better timing of traffic light and adding additional turn lanes at key intersections. And of course promoting Metro.

^ I always thought that getting the likes of Diverified Foam and Overhead Door to the underutilized Sunnen Business Park and away from Deer Creek a great idea.

Deer Creek is an underutilized asset for Webster Groves, Maplewood, and Shrewsbury. Getting light industry away from the creek, expanding the greenway and encouring housing along the Greenway seems a much better approach. Instead, you currently got this mess and pockets of light industrical on top of the creek itself.

Unfortunately, I get the impression that the idea is to fly over the mess when a buyout could put that money back into area businesses who might consider expanding or maybe add jobs if they have financial incentive to build out new facilities in Sunnen Industrial Park while re purposing the community in and around the creek.

I'm also on the fence with my house in Shrewsbury that is not to far from the metrolink station. Would like to see something happen in conjunction with extension of metrolink to I-55 in return for bringing that traffic to River Des Peres Road. But something much more sane that actually can be a re do for a defunct stip mall and light industial areas located on top of a local creek.

^FYI - The Deer Creek Center strip mall has been completely renvated including new parking lot. Chain stores such as Buy Buy Baby. Ross Dress, and Joanne Fabrics are already open.

moorlander wrote:^FYI - The Deer Creek Center strip mall has been completely renvated including new parking lot. Chain stores such as Buy Buy Baby. Ross Dress, and Joanne Fabrics are already open.

Thanks, last I saw was the TIF discussions. Didn't realized that they followed through or even had tenants.

I still believe the plan to add Assisted Living/housing with a reduced retail footprint before the real estate/financial crash was a good proposal for this site.

If you're opposed to this plan, consider writing a letter to the editor of the Webster-Kirkwood Times - mailbag@timesnewspapers.com.

I get the impression that many people in the area either have no idea about this project, or don't realize the impact it will have.