urbanSTL

NextSTL - Do St. Louis’s Street Blockages Enhance Walkability?

https://nextstl.com/2021/12/do-st-louis ... lkability/

I think the main takeaway should be that any street closures/one ways should be part of a larger plan and not done on a case by case basis as requested by a handful of local residents. In and of themselves they do not increase walkability but to say that they never can be used to increase walkability is, I think, going too far.

Ebsy wrote: ↑

Dec 13, 2021

I think the main takeaway should be that any street closures/one ways should be part of a larger plan and not done on a case by case basis as requested by a handful of local residents. In and of themselves they do not increase walkability but to say that they never can be used to increase walkability is, I think, going too far.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to say that. I was trying to say that if our goal is safe and walkable we'd wouldn't be doing what we've done. THe goal was something else McRee from Tower Grove to Grand could be a place for people on foot and wheel only accessed bt emergency, delivery, work vehicles. The street wouldn't be 36' wide, there would be continuous sidewalks across the N-S streets, or raised intersections. Maybe the sidewalk and the street would be the same. You certainly wouldn't have to dismount your bike which you'd have to do 4 times by my count.

Paywall. Can someone summarize?

Seems like Hubbard came out strongly against it, and sponsored the bill calling for its removal. The age is unknown, but the author said the style suggested it was from the seventies. (Which feels about right to my eye. I'd have guessed eighties, but what's ten years between friends. Seemed new.) Hubbard is promising speed humps for traffic calming. There are already some complaints, but it sounds like the neighborhood mostly wanted it gone, so . . . it's gone.

Thanks, but where exactly is the gate that was removed? 

Let me google that for you...

STLEnginerd wrote: ↑

Apr 14, 2023

Huh, i would have left the pillars.  They weren't spectacular but they were not ugly either.  Plus would have been way cheaper.  Just take down the steel gate and haul away, done.

Honestly probably would have been nice to install some modal filtering so that bikes and pedestrians can still traverse but not have cars cutting through. It seems like the main complaint was human access, not driving access, but I also lean towards modal filtering being ideal for most residential neighborhoods.

STLEnginerd wrote: ↑

Apr 14, 2023

Why?   Just add a few speed bumps.  Can't be that much cut through traffic with Debaliviere being a block away and no access till Pershing.  People speeding are probably people that live in the neighborhood.  They should stop speeding of course.

Seriously. Cities work best when drivers are traveling slowly for shorter distances (hopefully someday realizing that a walk was possible). Forcing people to drive an extra mile on Delmar and Kingshighway only encourages speeding, making those roads worse for cyclists and pedestrians. We have to de-suburbanize i.e. undo the arterials & culdusac retrofit of STL streets before we can start carving out space for pedestrian and cyclist only spaces. Currently we just don't have the demand because the best routes through the city are still traffic sewers.

A map of streets including those that have been vacated. #Healthegrid



https://stlcity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Em ... 756;102696

What's really interesting to see is how close in the grid and I assume density was to the train tracks in Mill Creek, it seems like today industrial use has swallowed up anything within a half-mile of them.

That map is at least a little bit misleading, as it shows streets which have technically been vacated, but which are very much open to pedestrians, and sometimes even cars in red. The King Louis Appartments, for instance, control Carol and 13th between 14th, Tucker, Lafayette, and Park. Both 13th and Carol are shown in red, but 13th is completely open to everyone and Carol is open halfway to cars, and the rest of the way to bikes and pedestrians. No healing required. It's fine. It's a nice little project with great density and even some architectural sensitivity. Even the industrial on the east side of Broadway isn't quite so badly closed down as that map implies. There are real problems. The highways have broken a great many things, and there are a lot of fences that aren't needed. But I wouldn't take that map as a great  guide on what needs fixing and where. Not all vacated streets are created equal. What we need isn't necessarily publicly owned and maintained streets in every location, but a sensible public right of way that encourages pedestrian activity and mode switching away from automobiles. I think it's time to retire the "heal the grid" slogan. It made sense at one time, but I'm hoping we're past that now. We don't need a grid. We need pedestrian access. Let me propose an alternative: "Streets are for People" with the unspoken part being they're not just for cars.

Agreed with above. I think one area it would be importantly to get that pedestrian access back is Debaliviere Place. Connecting the Delmar Loop/Debaliviere developments more easily to Central West End would do wonders for its attractiveness. There’s not a lot right around Debaliviere, and it’s walkable enough to the loop, but being more walkable to CWE would be a game changer I think. When I lived in Debaliviere, we would often walk to CWE to spend an afternoon or have drinks, but it was a way less convenient and pleasant walk than it should be. Some of our most beautiful streets - let people see them.

I don’t mind some purely residential streets doing what they want with car access if they maintain good streetscaping and such on their own. But there does have to be balance because you can’t then having them fight like they own everything around them when a new build is proposed or a business wants to come in a retail space.

Speaking of streets, interesting story to return to old street names: https://www.firstalert4.com/2025/03/19/ ... eet-names/

I for one would like a new “neighborhood” naming to (1) restore some historic names, (2) cut down the number by a few and (3) strategically define neighborhoods to maximize their appeal and value. For instance, consolidation of a “Tower Grove” neighborhood, one “Benton Park”, one “Downtown” and some other renames and new boundaries.

^Yeah, requiring pedestrian access through some of the private streets would probably be good. Tough sell, but good.

As to neighborhood names, just let them be unofficial. Number the wards. Name the streets. Let the neighborhoods be organic and fuzzy.

delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑

Mar 20, 2025

Speaking of streets, interesting story to return to old street names: https://www.firstalert4.com/2025/03/19/ ... eet-names/

First on the list should be Wharf Street. 

^Don't they still have a few signs on the Landing with the historic French names? Those are worth remembering. Wharf Street is still there south of Chouteau. I say stick up some signs with whatever the French name was. (I can't find that one.) First was Grande rue, apparently. And Second was Rue re l'eglise. Apparently Market was Rue de la place and Walnut Rue de la tour. (Assuming the French practice of capitalizing only the first word in a title applies to street names. Which . . . maybe?) Anyway, I'd be curious to see more.