urbanSTL

What is wrong with people that they would allow such crap?

I've asked this in other threads and of friends on many occasions. How do we get the people who make the decisions, politicians and developers, to understand what is now commonplace knowledge urban development. It's no longer at the cutting edge or fringe stage.



The mayor was quoting Jane Jacobs on his website. Rollin Stanley is clearly on board. Cities all over the country are zooming past us and we're more than a decade behind the curve??? How can a city like Chicago build every new city structure green and we can't stop a strip mall in Soulard?



I have no formal background in real estate, urban planning, development or commercial revitalization and I very clearly see the benefits. How come the people in power who should be up on these things are stuck in "we're just desperate for ANY development" mentality?



There are a few really great websites, but is there a book that clearly explains the benefits? Maybe we could have a fundraiser. Buy a bunch of copies of that book and give one to every Alderperson in the city? Seriously!

I think it may be time to "get the band back together" a la the S. Grand McDonald's.

DeBaliviere wrote:I think it may be time to "get the band back together" a la the S. Grand McDonald's.

The S. Grand McDonald's never got construction underway unlike this development. I agree that being a stronger, cohesive voice to avoid future inappropriate developments would be worthwhile.

DeBaliviere wrote:I think it may be time to "get the band back together" a la the S. Grand McDonald's.

Yes, having the closed McDonalds and Burger King on South Grand really improved that area.



(sarcastic)

dweebe wrote:Yes, having the closed McDonalds and Burger King on South Grand really improved that area.



(sarcastic)

I'll take short-term vacancies over long-term mistakes.

DeBaliviere wrote:I think it may be time to "get the band back together" a la the S. Grand McDonald's.

The band? The Band!!!







I'm ready.

dweebe wrote:

DeBaliviere wrote:I think it may be time to "get the band back together" a la the S. Grand McDonald's.

Yes, having the closed McDonalds and Burger King on South Grand really improved that area.



(sarcastic)

I agree.



With no sarcasm. We're not talking about losing Pho Grand, or Bahn Mi So or even the Wing Stop. I say tear those buildings down, with the hope of future development that benefits the city as a whole. I'm glad they're closed.



EDIT: And I would like to second (or third) the idea of getting the band back together. Its our own fault that we haven't gotten together since, but I don't think there has been a really important issue, development wise, for us to unite under.

The Union Station Starbucks has a sign up saying they are hiring for the Soulard location and that store should open on December 10th.

Ok - I know I'll get excoriated for saying this but when I heard that bread co was going in I was happy about it. Yes I hate strip malls as much as the rest of you. Yes I would prefer a truly urban design (street front retail - parking in back or underground etc) - and yes I would prefer an architectural match to soulard ....



but its not as if they tore down anything worthwhile to put these here. They're replacing ugly strip mall like buildings with less ugly strip mall buildings. I mean come on - have you guys looked at the east side of Broadway? Its a far cry from what I would want but its certainly an improvement ....



#2 I honestly think these will help spur the further development of soulard. Yes - an ideal development would do that more so, but having viable and (more than likely) bustling cafes and coffee shops is certainly preferable to vacant strip mallish quasi industrial buildings. I live down the street and I honestly believe that my property value went UP when they started this project. Bread Co's and Starbucks attract new residents and developers. I really believe that. They signal to the world that upscale retail believes in the area. No one buys five dollar coffees in the ghetto.



#3 I never considered this area part of soulard. I actually always thought it would be a great place to give the city some big box retail (in my dreams I imagined Best Buys or grocery stores like they have in Lincoln Park - up to the street with parking underground and residential apartments above). If they were putting these at 12th and Lami I would freak out.



anyway - I suppose I agree with you from an ideal standpoint but I still see it as an improvement. And lets remember - they're not building cathedrals here. These are temporary retail buildings. They can be plowed under as quickly as they can be raised. In ten years maybe they'll be replaced with something ideal.



On a side note - a new 24 hour diner just opened up almost directly behind th new starbucks. You guys should check it out. Soulard definitely needed a 24 diner with pancakes and such.

^ Is that Billie's Diner? I rode my bike back there the other day and didn't realize all that was on Broadway (Donut shop, Post Office, Globe Drug Store that looks like it's from 1972 and only open 4 hours a day).



And actually I somewhat agree about Bread Co. and Starbucks. The BreadCo building looks at least somewhat better than some of the cookie cutter strip mall developments.

The strip mall they are talking about developing at the old Nooter site just north of Park on Broadway bothers me a bit more. I know it's just a rendering but what they are talking about there is far more autocentric and cheap looking. Again, right now it's just renderings and that is a weedy lot so maybe someone will talk some sense into them before it gets underway.

I can't remember the name but I don't think it's Billy's. Its brand new - 24 hour (actually there's a night club attached to it as well) and it has a "60's diner" theme to it.

Wheeler's Cafe?

that might be it - honestly if you spelled the name for me I wouldn't remember. I was pretty hungover when I went there.

markofucity wrote:Ok - I know I'll get excoriated for saying this but when I heard that bread co was going in I was happy about it. Yes I hate strip malls as much as the rest of you. Yes I would prefer a truly urban design (street front retail - parking in back or underground etc) - and yes I would prefer an architectural match to soulard ....



but its not as if they tore down anything worthwhile to put these here. They're replacing ugly strip mall like buildings with less ugly strip mall buildings. I mean come on - have you guys looked at the east side of Broadway? Its a far cry from what I would want but its certainly an improvement ....



#2 I honestly think these will help spur the further development of soulard. Yes - an ideal development would do that more so, but having viable and (more than likely) bustling cafes and coffee shops is certainly preferable to vacant strip mallish quasi industrial buildings. I live down the street and I honestly believe that my property value went UP when they started this project. Bread Co's and Starbucks attract new residents and developers. I really believe that. They signal to the world that upscale retail believes in the area. No one buys five dollar coffees in the ghetto.



#3 I never considered this area part of soulard. I actually always thought it would be a great place to give the city some big box retail (in my dreams I imagined Best Buys or grocery stores like they have in Lincoln Park - up to the street with parking underground and residential apartments above). If they were putting these at 12th and Lami I would freak out.



anyway - I suppose I agree with you from an ideal standpoint but I still see it as an improvement. And lets remember - they're not building cathedrals here. These are temporary retail buildings. They can be plowed under as quickly as they can be raised. In ten years maybe they'll be replaced with something ideal.



On a side note - a new 24 hour diner just opened up almost directly behind th new starbucks. You guys should check it out. Soulard definitely needed a 24 diner with pancakes and such.

I think you make some good points. I really think we should be concerned with the stretch between Geyer and Lynch or maybe even to Marion so that Soulard Market doesn't see strip development across the street - in fact why can't they do something akin to the Loop and put up streetfront retail with a wide sidewalk and all the parking behind? I'm thinking specifically across from the Market. There are more than eight blocks from Geyer to Lynch and it's a stretch to say the least to expect urban retail on every block.

markofucity wrote:Ok - I know I'll get excoriated for saying this but when I heard that bread co was going in I was happy about it. Yes I hate strip malls as much as the rest of you. Yes I would prefer a truly urban design (street front retail - parking in back or underground etc) - and yes I would prefer an architectural match to soulard ....



but its not as if they tore down anything worthwhile to put these here. They're replacing ugly strip mall like buildings with less ugly strip mall buildings. I mean come on - have you guys looked at the east side of Broadway? Its a far cry from what I would want but its certainly an improvement ....



#2 I honestly think these will help spur the further development of soulard. Yes - an ideal development would do that more so, but having viable and (more than likely) bustling cafes and coffee shops is certainly preferable to vacant strip mallish quasi industrial buildings. I live down the street and I honestly believe that my property value went UP when they started this project. Bread Co's and Starbucks attract new residents and developers. I really believe that. They signal to the world that upscale retail believes in the area. No one buys five dollar coffees in the ghetto.



#3 I never considered this area part of soulard. I actually always thought it would be a great place to give the city some big box retail (in my dreams I imagined Best Buys or grocery stores like they have in Lincoln Park - up to the street with parking underground and residential apartments above). If they were putting these at 12th and Lami I would freak out.



anyway - I suppose I agree with you from an ideal standpoint but I still see it as an improvement. And lets remember - they're not building cathedrals here. These are temporary retail buildings. They can be plowed under as quickly as they can be raised. In ten years maybe they'll be replaced with something ideal.

Makes a lot of sense. I have a much bigger problem with the new retail development on the Nooter site than with the Bread Co./Starbucks. The Bread Co. is at least a renovation of an existing building where the developers of the other project have the opportunity to start entirely from scratch and still couldn't come up with a halfway decent design.

I agree with the Nooter point. - but I never got the impression that those renderings were anything more than a "possibility rendering" - aren't they just trying to lease the space.

DeBaliviere wrote:Makes a lot of sense. I have a much bigger problem with the new retail development on the Nooter site than with the Bread Co./Starbucks. The Bread Co. is at least a renovation of an existing building where the developers of the other project have the opportunity to start entirely from scratch and still couldn't come up with a halfway decent design.

I agree with you, and with all the points markofucity made. (See Mark, no one has excoriated you for what you said!)



The Starbucks/Bread Company development doesn't bother me all that much, especially since the BreadCo is a renovation of an existing building as DeBaliviere pointed out, and the Starbucks is relatively similar to other freestanding stores I've seen. Both are good tenants as well.



I find the plans for the Nooter site much more troublesome. I guess Georgian Square won't be all bad, but I'd like to see us aim higher for the Nooter site. It has the potential to transform future development in the area and make denser development along Seventh Street more of a likelihood in the long run. I don't know if the rendering posted is a final design, but it doesn't matter. It's anonymous and could be placed anywhere, and I don't have any reason to believe the developers share our concerns or have a vision of the best/highest use of that site.



Like others here, I think there's potential to accommodate chain retailers and increase density by building up to the curb of Seventh Street, and placing parking above, below, or behind the stores. Condos and/or apartments could even be built above the stores, bringing even more density to the area and effectively extending Soulard eastward. In other words, something similar to the Boulevard, albeit with better execution, attention to detail, planning, and stores that front Seventh Street instead of turning their backs to it as Boulevard St. Louis does with Brentwood Boulevard.



So yeah, I'm all for putting the band back together. We're on a mission from God. (Okay, maybe not, but it's a noble mission nevertheless.)

Why would we allow for the construction of anything with a ten year life span? Why don't we just build things like they did for the 1904 World's Fair--out of staff, a temporary building material if that's the case?



I try to think optimistically once St. Louis allows another scar on its landscape, but the truth of the matter is that if there are not enough residents vociferously concerned about this now, what makes anyone think that in ten years a developer is going to propose demolishing this strip mall? Who will demand it? No one will--it will become a part of the accepted cityscape, much as every other detrimental project has.



It's time to start behaving like a city that wants to see itself improve. Other cities debate what "Smart Growth" procedures to enact.



St. Louis seems obsessed with "Dumb Shrink," a way of development that emphasizes only dubious, short term economic benefit in the context of a shrinking (economically or demographically) city.

ThreeOneFour wrote:I find the plans for the Nooter site much more troublesome. I guess Georgian Square won't be all bad, but I'd like to see us aim higher for the Nooter site. It has the potential to transform future development in the area and make denser development along Seventh Street more of a likelihood in the long run. I don't know if the rendering posted is a final design, but it doesn't matter. It's anonymous and could be placed anywhere, and I don't have any reason to believe the developers share our concerns or have a vision of the best/highest use of that site.



Like others here, I think there's potential to accommodate chain retailers and increase density by building up to the curb of Seventh Street, and placing parking above, below, or behind the stores. Condos and/or apartments could even be built above the stores, bringing even more density to the area and effectively extending Soulard eastward. In other words, something similar to the Boulevard, albeit with better execution, attention to detail, planning, and stores that front Seventh Street instead of turning their backs to it as Boulevard St. Louis does with Brentwood Boulevard.

Having quality urban infill oh the east side of 7th would really help Soulard appear not quite so cut off from its surroundings. And of course, on the other side of 7th, in the preservation district, the infill is much more attractive: Link

That infill for the corner of Geyer and 7ths looks more like something that would fit Tower Grove architecture, doesn't it?

^ Yes - certainly not Soulard architecture. It's much more 1900-1910 than 1880.

Is the 24hr diner where Dino's pizza and Stagger Lee's used to be?

Yes, to Downtown2007.



They are pouring the concrete drive today so Panera should be opening soon.

Honestly I think it looks like crap. I like the strip mall at McKnight and Manchester better than what I see in the renderings. Why is it so hard to come up with something different. Fine you want to build a strip mall but how putting some real thought in it. I would have liked to seen something that either fits in the neighborhood or some that makes you say wow. This makes me say blah.