I've been to the top of the Arch several times. I'd say more than 5, less than 10.
- 1,517
I didn't see that question. I've been to the Arch about 4 or so times in my life...and never with someone from out of town either... 
I think one thing our city should do is re-engage our riverfront to our city (currently blocked by an Interstate highway). Cincinnati had the same problem we currently do with their riverfront being cut off from their downtown, so they buried their highway and re-connected their downtown to their riverfront amenity (riverfront park). St. Louis should look at proper developments to take advantage of our riverfront (not for a boating marina but as a true pedestrian amenity - greeenway/park expansion). Until we re-connect our downtown with our riverfront we will never realize it's potential (right now our riverfront is it's own island).
- 407
Speaking of Cinncinnati, I was there a couple of years ago to see the Cardinals play and was amazed by how connected the riverfront was to the rest of their downtown. As you watched the ballgame you could watch the riverboats and jetskis zoom by just on the other side of the outfield walls. I was also impressed with the attractive streetscape they had throughout their downtown. Picture all of our downtown streets looking like Washington Ave. And hey, if Cinncinnati can do, why can't we?
- 1,768
Matt Drops The H wrote:I didn't see that question. I've been to the Arch about 4 or so times in my life...and never with someone from out of town either...
Wow. I have been well over 30 times. Everytime a friend from college, relative, or one of my many siblings bring frineds in to town we go to the arch and the brewery tour. Then, we eat and drink. Makes for a good day. When I was a kid we had our extended family went once a year as a group.
True True, decking over i-70 will help connect the arch grounds to downtown, making the area into perhaps a more well used urban park. But this plan does not fix the main riverfront problem: a poor conection between the grounds and the riverfront. As always, my solution is to abandon the riverfront as we know it. Rip out the current riverfront, expand the Arch grounds east, put parking underneath, and provide good access north and south of the grounds to funnle people off of the gounds and into the landinings. Why create competitng venuse in an isolated area like the riverfront, when a good plan could use the arch grounds as a way to funnle people between downtown and the landings.
- 1,610
The Arch really only feels disconnected from the riverfront due to its high flood walls, but the Arch sits on a bluff.
You have to remember though that Pierre Laclede chose his settlement site due to the natural yet relatively small bluff close to the river's edge. While East St. Louis is largely in the American Bottoms flood plain, the City of St. Louis is largely out of the flood plain, except a long, narrow strip north of downtown and a pocket south. But these respective Near North and North Riverfront and Kosciusko neighborhoods are primarily industrial areas.
The part of the riverfront I think most feel is unimproved or uninviting is really the "levee" or water's edge. But since this area is susceptible to the changing levels of the Mighty Miss, those constraints really limit water's edge development to open spaces and recreational use.
Memphis is comparable example of what can be done where you have a wide, variable, and fast flowing river. But their Mud Island creates a smaller inner river abutting their downtown. And we lack any major island near downtown. Plus, it doesn't hurt that Memphis doesn't have industrial and Interstate highways cutting off its riverfront bluffs from the rest of the city. Other than Mud Island (cultural attraction on southern end, but marinas and New Urbanist housing on northern end), Memphis has bluff lined new housing, but the flood-susceptible riverfront below is still largely just recreational trails.
I think any of the recent local riverfront plan alternatives, by proposing to add additional accessways beyond the grand staircase of the archgrounds, like that to the Eads Bridge, will help overcome how our sculptural landscaped bluff presently overlooks a bland "levee" below. But more importantly (and unfortunately outside the riverfront plans), I think added residential in Chouteau's Landing, Laclede's Landing and Near North Riverfront will be crucial to adding street life back to the wharf that connects them.
You have to remember though that Pierre Laclede chose his settlement site due to the natural yet relatively small bluff close to the river's edge. While East St. Louis is largely in the American Bottoms flood plain, the City of St. Louis is largely out of the flood plain, except a long, narrow strip north of downtown and a pocket south. But these respective Near North and North Riverfront and Kosciusko neighborhoods are primarily industrial areas.
The part of the riverfront I think most feel is unimproved or uninviting is really the "levee" or water's edge. But since this area is susceptible to the changing levels of the Mighty Miss, those constraints really limit water's edge development to open spaces and recreational use.
Memphis is comparable example of what can be done where you have a wide, variable, and fast flowing river. But their Mud Island creates a smaller inner river abutting their downtown. And we lack any major island near downtown. Plus, it doesn't hurt that Memphis doesn't have industrial and Interstate highways cutting off its riverfront bluffs from the rest of the city. Other than Mud Island (cultural attraction on southern end, but marinas and New Urbanist housing on northern end), Memphis has bluff lined new housing, but the flood-susceptible riverfront below is still largely just recreational trails.
I think any of the recent local riverfront plan alternatives, by proposing to add additional accessways beyond the grand staircase of the archgrounds, like that to the Eads Bridge, will help overcome how our sculptural landscaped bluff presently overlooks a bland "levee" below. But more importantly (and unfortunately outside the riverfront plans), I think added residential in Chouteau's Landing, Laclede's Landing and Near North Riverfront will be crucial to adding street life back to the wharf that connects them.
southslider,
great thoughts on the riverfront. I think the inclusion of several different and distinct neighborhoods would add some much needed flavor to our sparse riverfront.
great thoughts on the riverfront. I think the inclusion of several different and distinct neighborhoods would add some much needed flavor to our sparse riverfront.
Just because we here in St. Louis love contemplating how decisions of past generations have created messes for us, I'd like to be pedantic and point out that the berm the Arch sits atop is artificial. It was a late addition to the site plan in order to bury the railroad (the existance of which somehow managed to catch planners by surprise).
Yes, Laclede chose the site of our fair city for the flood-proof bluff, but it wasn't that tall!
This is unfortunate, as the original plan had the Arch much closer to the water and would have permitted viewing the water from the Courthouse and vice-versa. Perhaps with all the interest of late in staying true to Saarinen's intentions we can call for having it moved?
Yes, Laclede chose the site of our fair city for the flood-proof bluff, but it wasn't that tall!
This is unfortunate, as the original plan had the Arch much closer to the water and would have permitted viewing the water from the Courthouse and vice-versa. Perhaps with all the interest of late in staying true to Saarinen's intentions we can call for having it moved?
Phobia,
You're right. But, if my memory is correct, didn't the railroads refuse to sell their right-of-way track in front of the river for the Arch project?
I think it sucks that we couldn't just kick them off so many years ago. It would have made for much more interesting scene.
You're right. But, if my memory is correct, didn't the railroads refuse to sell their right-of-way track in front of the river for the Arch project?
I think it sucks that we couldn't just kick them off so many years ago. It would have made for much more interesting scene.
- 1,054
If Kansas City could make a strong push for their Power and Light District, then surely St. Louis could push a large development of a Riverfront district other than entertainment.
Mayor Slay and respected public officials if you read this forum please head our call and challenge developers to collaborate on a residential district along the riverfront (needs to include a private school and affordable housing units for families). Let's do the Seattle thing and trade developer built public amenities for more height and space.
Mayor Slay and respected public officials if you read this forum please head our call and challenge developers to collaborate on a residential district along the riverfront (needs to include a private school and affordable housing units for families). Let's do the Seattle thing and trade developer built public amenities for more height and space.
- 1,517
From http://www.mayorslay.com
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Mouth of Babes
Two groups of students from an elementary school in St. Louis county recently sent me their suggestions for elements/attractions to be included in the final version of the Downtown riverfront plan. I wrote back to them thanking them for their willingness to be involved in the process. I told them that their participation was important ? and their ideas, welcome.
Antoine, Randell, John, Josh, and Ryan urged me to support ?things for kids to do? and they even included a map and some prices.
They suggested:
?Helicopter rides for $20
?Public basketball courts
?A go cart track
?A dirt bike track
?Monster truck rides for $10
Eric, Alex, Robert, Chris, Ricky, and two different Kyles also drew a map, but they did not include a pricing strategy.
They suggested:
?A dog park
?A volcano roller coaster
?A flag on top of the Arch
?A haunted mine train
?A pirate restaurant
?Public baseball diamonds
?A skate park
I know that Planning Director Rollin Stanley and the other planners will take these suggestions ? and the ideas behind them ? very seriously. If I didn?t laugh when Rollin sent me a memo about floating islands in the Mississippi, I am pretty sure he is not going to laugh when I forward to him a suggestion about a pirate restaurant.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Mouth of Babes
Two groups of students from an elementary school in St. Louis county recently sent me their suggestions for elements/attractions to be included in the final version of the Downtown riverfront plan. I wrote back to them thanking them for their willingness to be involved in the process. I told them that their participation was important ? and their ideas, welcome.
Antoine, Randell, John, Josh, and Ryan urged me to support ?things for kids to do? and they even included a map and some prices.
They suggested:
?Helicopter rides for $20
?Public basketball courts
?A go cart track
?A dirt bike track
?Monster truck rides for $10
Eric, Alex, Robert, Chris, Ricky, and two different Kyles also drew a map, but they did not include a pricing strategy.
They suggested:
?A dog park
?A volcano roller coaster
?A flag on top of the Arch
?A haunted mine train
?A pirate restaurant
?Public baseball diamonds
?A skate park
I know that Planning Director Rollin Stanley and the other planners will take these suggestions ? and the ideas behind them ? very seriously. If I didn?t laugh when Rollin sent me a memo about floating islands in the Mississippi, I am pretty sure he is not going to laugh when I forward to him a suggestion about a pirate restaurant.
^Great! I hope they gave them the UrbSTL website so we can get their opinions on other projects 
- 1,517
Expat wrote:^Great! I hope they gave them the UrbSTL website so we can get their opinions on other projects
We should email Slay this site's URL and see if he makes a post on it. I'll bet he would.
<Scours forum to remove any negative comments about Slay>
- 2,005
Believe me the ghostwriter of Mayorslay.com reads this site. I made a statement on this forum a while back concerning the location of the LaSalle Building(it originally said it was on Broadway and Pine on the mayors blog). The blog entry was changed later that week to the correct intersection.
Sunday, August 14, 2005
History in the Making
The LaSalle Investment Company Building at Broadway and Olive (thanks, brickandmortar) Streets. This is a wonderful, tall, narrow (very narrow!) building with unique bay windows. Listing this property on the National Register will allow much-needed improvements to be made without pricing the building out of the market.
Sunday, August 14, 2005
History in the Making
The LaSalle Investment Company Building at Broadway and Olive (thanks, brickandmortar) Streets. This is a wonderful, tall, narrow (very narrow!) building with unique bay windows. Listing this property on the National Register will allow much-needed improvements to be made without pricing the building out of the market.
- 1,517
Wow, brickandmortar, that's awesome! I guess this site is a bit too polarized and tad too political for an official endorsement?
- 2,005
I thought it was pretty funny when I read my screenname on that website. I doubt we'll get any official posts, but who knows maybe urbanstlouis will get an award from the mayor or a mention in the blog someday 
Of course I still think that we can still be critical of things going on in Room 200.
Of course I still think that we can still be critical of things going on in Room 200.
- 1,517
brickandmortar wrote:I thought it was pretty funny when I read my screenname on that website. I doubt we'll get any official posts, but who knows maybe urbanstlouis will get an award from the mayor or a mention in the blog someday
Of course I still think that we can still be critical of things going on in Room 200.
Yes. Any true mayor would want an informed and invested public to call him out when he wanders, right?
Most of the kids ideas are a little, well...let's just say I'm not surprised that a kid suggested them (Monster truck rides?). But there's a good point about the basketball courts. Why aren't there more outdoor courts in St. Louis? At least good ones where you can get a game going with whoever is there. I know where to get games all over the Metro area, but the only outdoor court I would ever go to for good competition are the courts on Laclede Station right by 64/40.
I always add basketball courts to my beach/riverfront areas in Simcity. 
Hey, don't get me wrong, I think it would be fun to go on a Monster Truck ride...but I think there are places in JeffCo that can provide that.
- 1,282
Safety tops riverfront wish list, poll finds
By Jake Wagman
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
12/19/2005
A fishing pier on the Mississippi River? A rock-climbing wall next to the Arch? Pet day care downtown?
Perhaps, but what most people really want on the riverfront is just better parking and to feel safer, according to a survey released Monday.
The poll was sponsored by the Danforth Foundation, which has pledged money toward designing a "lid" over Interstate 70 that would make the riverfront area more accessible.
The survey shows about 75 percent of people questioned visited the riverfront a few times a year or less. Only about one of four said they were at the riverfront once a month or more.
Eighty-five percent of people surveyed said they supported the efforts of local government and civic organizations to improve the riverfront. Ninety percent said they would be more likely to visit the area if safety features such as lighted walkways were added. More than half said they would be "much more likely" to visit if there were convenient parking and public restrooms.
When asked specifically what would make the riverfront better, some of the ideas that generated the most interest were a boardwalk with cafes and restaurants and cultural institutions such as a sculpture garden.
Read More
By Jake Wagman
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
12/19/2005
A fishing pier on the Mississippi River? A rock-climbing wall next to the Arch? Pet day care downtown?
Perhaps, but what most people really want on the riverfront is just better parking and to feel safer, according to a survey released Monday.
The poll was sponsored by the Danforth Foundation, which has pledged money toward designing a "lid" over Interstate 70 that would make the riverfront area more accessible.
The survey shows about 75 percent of people questioned visited the riverfront a few times a year or less. Only about one of four said they were at the riverfront once a month or more.
Eighty-five percent of people surveyed said they supported the efforts of local government and civic organizations to improve the riverfront. Ninety percent said they would be more likely to visit the area if safety features such as lighted walkways were added. More than half said they would be "much more likely" to visit if there were convenient parking and public restrooms.
When asked specifically what would make the riverfront better, some of the ideas that generated the most interest were a boardwalk with cafes and restaurants and cultural institutions such as a sculpture garden.
Read More
Parking??? Are you kidding me? I've never had trouble finding parking. Why are these people always looking for parking? Tell them to get off their lazy butts and walk.