urbanSTL

jstriebel wrote:Received a wonderful response from Alderman of the 6th Ward (where this QT will go) Christine Ingrassia. I still ultimately disagree with the decision, but it gives me significantly more confidence in our leadership when I see their detailed reasoning behind decisions and simply when they're willing to take the time to explain it to concerned citizens.

i find the response to be depressing. the "reasoning" that the dental building is responsible for accidents at this intersection, rather than Jefferson being a 5-lane highway, is just nuts and completely unsubstantiated. it could equally be used to justify the demolition of buildings at almost any intersection in St. Louis or any other city. i don't even know what to say... it's so patently f*cking obvious, and our "leadership" has had so many f*cking opportunities to learn... but they don't. ever. you can either raze all your buildings and make it as safe and easy as possible for people to speed through with a clear line of sight out to Fenton, or you can have a f*cking city in which people want to live, but not both.

I don't agree with her points or her decision, either. I'm just applaud that she had multiple reasons and took the time to explain them. I absolutely plan to respond to her and explain to her why I disagree with many of the things she said.

^ sure. i mean, it's nice that she took the time to explain them, but they're not really reasons in the sense that logic was used to come to any sort of conclusion. she's simply reacting to pressure from a handful of constituents and QT, which gives me very little confidence in her leadership if not her ability to reason.

Zero leadership. She needs to educate them on why a QT should not be there.

Heard on the radio that there was a collision at that intersection this morning.

"That building jumped right in front of me!"

The bike lanes coming to Chouteau will improve the line of sight because the travel lane will be further away from the curb line.

We seriously need ethics laws in Missouri.

Looks like Crown 40 and QuikTrip have donated to her campaign.
http://www.mec.mo.gov/

I look forward to attending future public meetings to state my opposition. There will be a cultural resources review to approve the building demolitions. Also there will be a liquor license hearing to approve liquor sales at the QT. We need to be at both of those.

This will improve the sight lines! Hahahaha. What an idiot. Reconnecting urban fabric should be the goal. Always. Has anyone seen historic photos of Jefferson at Market? That should be the goal, and not emulating Manchester Road west of 270. It's sad that she really thinks this is progress for the area. Who is this woman?

I was a former resident of that neighborhood. Can someone repost her email? I can't find it. I would like to weigh in to her.

There's a change.org petition out there if anyone is interested

https://www.change.org/p/francis-g-slay ... ef=Default

Forbes currently lists QT as the 27th largest private company in the US, one spot behind Hilton, and several behind truck stop behemoths, Flying J and Love's.

In the building of their 700+ locations, I think they have rarely encountered much opposition. What is the history of the 3 locations they operate on Gravois in the city and the other one they left? I don't know if they did any demo for those and what, if any, opposition they faced then. I do recall the opposition much more recently to the Vandy location. With a much hurried search of google maps, I can't find any QT locations in any of the metropolises they operate in, including their home, Tulsa, that are similarly situated in a neighborhood of obvious historic character. They do have some locations, including some newer ones here in the St. Louis area, where the store is shoehorned in sideways.

Assuming they own all of the property between Lasalle and Chouteau from Jefferson to the remaining buildings on Lasalle (and maybe even further still on Chouteau), it doesn't seem like it would be too difficult for even this titan of private business, somewhat understandably and likely unwilling to take on the extra costs associated with doing something truly remarkable here, to site this location in such a way as to "save face" so to speak and capitalize on some hipness.

I'll have no problems envisioning the 16+ pumps sited on Chouteau west of the 3 corner buildings as I come across the Jefferson viaduct, leaving Wells Fargo headed for 44, and by the time I hit the fire station going north, I'll still have plenty of time to pull in to the "front" of the store behind the corner lots. Shoot, I wouldn't object to a big spinning QT on top of the corner building. I know of no restrictions holding them back here. Who knows, in a few decades, maybe even it will be proclaimed historic.

For me it's more about saving productive development patterns than historic buildings

KMOV - Controversy swirls over proposed QT station in St. Louis' Gate Neighborhood

Some residents who live near a site for a proposed QuikTrip gas station and mart in the Gate District have said they do not want the project to go forward.

http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Many-res ... 42521.html

For me it's more about saving productive development patterns than historic buildings

This is the point I think media & people for these types of developments miss.

It's always framed as "preservationists are building huggers" and are anti-development, but if they dug a little deeper they'd see that the argument is really all about the money and how the City could make more by following certain development practices.

Site plan finally emerges. 60 parking spaces.

UrbanReviewSTL.com @urbanreviewstl

6th ward Ald Christine Ingrassia is upset I shared the #QT site plan, she just wanted my help arranging the Titanic deck chairs.

quincunx wrote:Site plan finally emerges. 60 parking spaces.

UrbanReviewSTL.com @urbanreviewstl

6th ward Ald Christine Ingrassia is upset I shared the #QT site plan, she just wanted my help arranging the Titanic deck chairs.

I can't read the source. Why would a QT have 60 parking spaces?

Worked for me. Man is this city in a sad state when we tear down two perfectly good buildings sitting next to a vacant lot to put in a gas station.

Assuming 1 person per car, 60 people has got to be pushing the occupancy limits of a QT.

Another interesting thing about QT is their previous use of a store model that featured front and back customer entrances. The recently replaced store at Lilac and 270 is one example and I'm quite sure I've been to one other example in the metro area, although I can't remember where. It might be wise to have a thoughtful design ready to go for a more traditional corner store, especially before they go knockin' down really old and cherished (not to mention occupied) buildings of character. Maybe an alternative design with a corner entrance and a "back" or fuel pump entrance, to supplement their newer 3 entrance stores (which are fantastic in the right context), would be better received.

Quik Trip might be busy, but it isn't that busy.

The store in Wentzville has a front and back entrance unless it's been re-done since I went away to college. It's not front and back in a cool urban manner or anything that's really positive. In fact, I think there's some parking that wraps around the back causing the "need" for it. But I'm just saying it does have entrances on both sides.