urbanSTL

Urban Elitist wrote:GASP!! Crime in New Town!! And without Metrolink...Well, I guess it's time to scrap this project and move out further west.....

lol Yeah, get chummy with the rednecks out in Wentzville? I think not

Rednecks in Wentzville? I would think there are enough in St. Charles as is. Hell, St. Louis City isn't redneck-free for that matter. You didn't move to New Town to get away from rednecks.

DanaReale wrote:
lol Yeah, get chummy with the rednecks out in Wentzville? I think not

Someone from St. Charles calling people who live further west rednecks......



"Stop calling me black!", said the kettle to the pot.

Urban Elitist wrote:Someone from St. Charles calling people who live further west rednecks......



"Stop calling me black!", said the kettle to the pot.

Um, yeah, do you think that it might be possible that I'm not one of the St. Charles rednecks? Or that I'm not a redneck at all? As a matter of fact, as if anyone cares, I moved here from Canada about 8 years ago, and do consider myself to have a hell of a lot more class than most people out here. I don't ask what high school people come from, I don't like Imo's pizza (but their bosco sticks are damned good), and I don't care what color you are, you get treated with respect unless you disrespect me first.



/rant off



Can't anyone take a freaking joke without trying to one-up someone or insult them? What is it with Missouri?

DanaReale wrote:Can't anyone take a freaking joke without trying to one-up someone or insult them? What is it with Missouri?

Missouri?!.... That's the American Way!

warwickland wrote:i don't think that people realize how lucky they are to have new town in the st. louis metro, and the precident it sets for the st. louis area.

I was thinking the same thing this morning.



New Urbanism is a movement popping up all over the country. People are having a conversation across the nation about the good, the bad, where it will lead, how to improve it, why it is happening, how to use the principles in other settings, is it real or memorex, is it a movement or is it window dressing, etc. and so on.



Fortunately, St. Louis has a good example, bringing the dicussion home and making it real. Unfortunately, too many people would rather bash & badger New Town than have a real discussion. I don't understand it.



Forgive me for sounding like a moderator, perhaps this is none of my business, but I wish people would remember a few things when they post about this neighborhood (or any neighborhood):



1. This is home to many people. It is more than a concept, these are real people with real feelings.



2. Tearing down someone else does not build yourself up. Same for neighborhoods. Trashing someone elses neighborhood doesn't make yours any better. Focus on making your neighborhood better, not finding fault in others.



3. If a point has been made 10 times, it doesn't need to made again. For instance, we know about the flood plain issue, the milk is spilled, a dead horse is being beaten. Pointing out the issue in connection with New Town every few days adds nothing new. After a while, it is just a weapon. Developing in flood plains is a serious issue which needs to be discussed at a regional level. At this point, it adds nothing to the discussion of New Town or New Urbanism. To help City people understand, it is like someone bringing up crime or bad schools for the 10th time in connection with a particular development in the City.



4. A serious discussion can be fun and enlightening. There is so much to talk about in regards to New Urbanism and New Town. It is right in your back yard. Take advantage of the situation. Bashing & throwing lobs only stops the real discussion, turns people away, and sometimes gets the thread locked. It is possible to have a serious discussion without hurting peoples feelings or totally stomping on a neighborhood.



5. Live and let live. Just because you don't want to live in a particular neigbhorhood, there is no need to question the motives & taste of those that do. And if you have a pure hatred for New Town, for your own mental health, avoid this thread.

Doug, you are making points about a much bigger issue than New Town. You are making points about urban sprawl, which I understand and agree completely.



But, this isn't a case of building in St. Charles as opposed to building in St. Louis County. The same number of houses would have been built in St. Charles County no matter what. In my opinion, the discussion should be around the benefit or drawback of building in the New Urbanist style as opposed to the traditional sprawl subdivision style. Or a discussion of the execution, which goes way beyond the location. You are making the assumption that the developer chose to build in St. Charles over St. Louis County. That isn't the case. The developer was going to build in St. Charles County anyway.



Funny thing is, if they had built an ordinary sprawl subdivision on the very same spot, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

How can this be "New Urbanism" when it is far from the urban core?



Summary: I do not think understand why New Urbanism advocates placing these developments so far from the urban core. Even if all of the members of the community work in the neighborhood, then there are still negatives which could be avoided if the development is closer to the city.

Urbanism new or otherwise is not just about large cities. For example Hermann, Mo is a nice example of "traditional town, neighborhood, city, whatever you want to call it, planning. The bulk of the town is contained in a small relatively dense "downtown" area that combines homes, restaurants, shops, banks etc. Yet the town itself is only home to about 2600 people. A development does not have be in the urban core to be urban itself. Also New Town covers around 500 - 600 acres. Those kind of chunks of land just do not exist anymore in St Louis or St Louis County. In fact they really don't exist much anymore in St Charles County, save for the extreem western edges of the county. The fact that New Town is in a flood plain is the only reason that the land had not been developed, given that it is in the far eastern edge of St Charles County.

Thank you for your words of wisom, Expat. I think this topic got a little off-track, and started to turn into a mud-flinging match.



I do agree with Expat, warwickland and mcarril - what constitues 'urban' is subjective. What someone calls "the City" is different if you live in Poplar Bluff or in St. Peters, or even dependant on what side of your town you live on.



"Urban" means:

• relating to or concerned with a city or densely populated area; "urban sociology"; "urban development"
• located in or characteristic of a city or city life; "urban property owners"; "urban affairs"; "urban manners"

So pretty much anywhere in the St. Louis area is "urban" and subjective. No point in arguing which is best, because everyone has their preferences, their motives and reasons for living where they do. Priorities are different, people are different.







In the option "C" above (in Doug's post), a lot of people work in St. Charles City, and thus would give the same benefits as "C", for those that work in St. Charles. It's not as bad as if everyone worked in St. Louis or O'Fallon... in my view, anyway.

DanaReale wrote:I think this topic got a little off-track, and started to turn into a mud-flinging match.

It was getting off track. Thank you Expat, warwickland and mcarril in helping to bring this topic back on topic again. Let's keep this thread a discussion about the New Town at St. Charles development and less about urban sprawl. Thanks.

I like this project. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't consider moving all the way out there but for those that like living out in the counties, or in this case, way out in the counties, it is a very nice option.



Looks like the developer has done a great job. I know this project has received a lot of press in Missouri and other parts of the country.

This semester the PLN 372 Community Development class did its annual visit to St. Louis for Downtown, Soulard, Lafayette Square, and New Town which replaced the CWE. The students were fortunate to meet with City of St. Charles planners and were given several documents by D-Z on New Town on loan for designing their final projects around. Those projects are to compare neighborhoods by SWOT analysis or strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.



I mention this to continue the New Town talk and how it's placement in Missouri which makes it a good candidate for studying by planning students along with the last eastern city and her reviving old hoods (STL in case someone forgets).

Well, I finally made an expedition out to New Town, and I gotta say, its really quite nice.



It's much larger than I expected. And much denser, too. They really pack the houses close together (not to mention the rowhouses and apartments). The backyards are so small, I guess most of the kids will tend to gather in some of the many community greenspaces (I assume there won't be "keep off the grass" signs posted).



Strolling up some of the side streets, I actually found myself forgetting where I was. It really does have the feel of classic, American, Small Town USA. There's a nice mix of styles, although I felt a bit overwhelmed (oppressed?) at times by the constantly repeating mandatory color scheme. And the St. Louis-Style brick rowhouses were nicely done, but seemed kind of out-of-place.



The commercial area is starting to fill in now, and should provide a nice focal point for the community. I can see how it would be a very pleasant walk to the market, or to the ampitheater for an evening concert, etc. We'll have to wait and see if this kind of pedestrian activity really becomes the norm.



Of course, New Town is just that, a NEW town. The trees are tiny, there's not many people out and about, and very few businesses are open yet. In short, not much character. And yes, there's definitly an eerie "Pleasantville" vibe. It's completely surrounded by cornfields, after all! And I would be concerned about potentially draconian "community design standards". But in ten years, I believe this will be a very beautiful, much loved neighborhood.



Don't get me wrong; I'm not ready to give up the city yet. But who knows? Maybe after I retire, this kind of place will be just right for me.

Thanks Framer. I have been looking forward to your appraisal of New Town. It will be interesting to see how these types of developments mature, how they will influence future development, how they will hold their value in comparison to other types of suburban development. It is an interesting experiment to have nearby.

There is much about New Urbanism that is open to interpretation. A development like New Town, in my view, is on the edge of the norm. It looks like a movie set. IMHO, the style or design should have been something less contrived and more authentic to the customer base. If you want to live around historical buildings, move to an historic district. There is nothing wrong or off the mark in New Urbanism with contemporary or modern design. I've visited Civano in Tucson and it's design is a great blend of modern desert with an interpretation of historic adobe architecture. I think the adress is something like www.civano.com.

^ that website didn't pull up but it sounds interesting, I'd like to see some pictures. Perhaps as the movement matures it can start moving on to some more contemperary design, but they have to build to their market. Right now traditional design is the sugary coating that helps the jagged little pill of urbanism go down smoother with the general public.



The biggest thing that makes it seemed contrived, in my opinion, is that it's built up all at once from a single developer, whereas most "towns" are built by many different folks over a longer period of time. Maybe after some time passes some people will deviate from the design scheme, some weeds will spring up between cracks in the sidewalk, and it will acquire some of that spontaneity that we associate with urban neighborhoods.

jefferson wrote: Maybe after some time passes some people will deviate from the design scheme

I get the distinct feeling that New Town has very specific rules about what type of changes people will be able to make to their homes and property. There are actually large signs posted on one of the main streets showing samples of the "approved" colors of New Town. Does anyone know what types of bylaws are in place to govern this sort of thing, and how long the rules are meant to last?

As I said in a previous post, I like this project but it felt too "perfect" when driving through there. Reminded me of that Jim Carrey movie "The Truman Show". Kinda creepy.



Here are some pics that I took when I went there this weekend with a friend who wanted to see it. We both agree that we felt out of touch with society while we were there.

Thank you for the pics.



What's a word that means more extreme than "extreme"?



This has to be the most perverse take on New Urbanism that I've seen.



What's it like to live in a cake decoration in the middle of a cornfield? Good luck on resale values, folks.