Alex Ihnen wrote:

DaronDierkes wrote:I've noticed that virtually everyone here has this idea in their head that the one thing downtown needs more than anything else is the Shedd Aquarium. Like this competition around the arch grounds is all about where to put the aquarium and that's the silver bullet that will make us a major international city.

I don't see that at all.

That idea is perpetuated more by STLToday posters than anyone here.

I think there is a strong point to be made that a downtown museum would be a nice attraction for the neighborhood. Imagine how vibrant our downtown would be if we had our Science, Art, and History museums downtown. Imagine those busy buildings lining edges of gateway mall.

Alex Ihnen wrote:^ But those are two different things. IF all of those things could be downtown I'd agree, but putting a traditional aquarium (think shark tunnels, etc.) downtown is a bad idea, I think.

I know aquariums can be money pits but a nice aquarium would be attraction that I would go to. What's the hesitation if someone wanted to open up and anquarium downtown?

Imagine how dead Forest Park be without a History, Science and Art Museum. I'm for one was excited about Dansforth not getting his museum on the Arch Grounds. Heck it already has a museum.

I think many posters see downtown as the place to be the region's center of commerce and its connection should be to the river. The rest will follow if you keep putting jobs, residents and businesses back downtown.

Props to Dredger for pointing out that there already is a museum connected to the arch. So many people seem to miss that. That museum could certainly be expanded, of course. Such an expansion coupled with a history museum partnership makes perfect sense. If the museum of westward expansion and the Alton River Museum collaborated with the museum of transportation, the Admiral could be floating between downtown and the confluence. That'd be cool.

I joked once about expanding the museum of westward expansion with an underwater tunnel to the east STL waterfront using this rendering from the Bering Strait tunnel,



Think it would fill up with mud? Maybe some giant catfish would swim through occasionally.

If there's a downtown aquarium, I'd like it to be an expansion of the World Aquarium in partnership with the zoo. Forest Park has our flagship museums, there's no reason why they can't open little outpost museums where they are appropriate, especially if done in collaboration to prop up someone else's effort. The city museum doesn't need to go it alone. The zoo has a large budget and regional support. If they put some of their staff and volunteers in the World Aquarium, both institutions would be the better for it.

I think there is a strong point to be made that a downtown museum would be a nice attraction for the neighborhood. Imagine how vibrant our downtown would be if we had our Science, Art, and History museums downtown. Imagine those busy buildings lining edges of gateway mall.

Downtown has plenty of museums. There are the two that have been mentioned, the Campbell House Museum, Soldier's Memorial, the Central Library (in a way), and part of the transportation museum is at Union Station (go collaboration and extension services!). The Field House Museum is sort of in downtown, and it's connected to the Old Courthouse thematically. Isn't there a wax museum on the landing? We used to have a bowling museum... whatever happened to... oh right, the city subsidized its eviction... The cardinals museum will probably happen at some point, and I believe the history museum is slightly associated with that.

To repeat, if we invest in the museums we have, they'll be fantastic. If we just wish for Chicago's museum's we'll lose our identity and make cheap simulacras.

Personally, I'd like to see Soldier's Memorial and plaza (brick by brick) moved to Jefferson Barracks and set up next to the Civil War Museum in the slowly growing museum campus there, maybe where you can see fields of gravestones from its steps. That'd be insanely expensive, of course, but as is, its a bit of a dead space in the 'civic room' of the gateway mall.

A larger privately owned stand-alone aquarium would work in downtown St. Louis. Ripleys owns aquariums in Gatlinburg and in Myrtle Beach. In Gatlinburg, they charge $19 per adult and $10 per child.

http://gatlinburg.ripleyaquariums.com/

The Dallas World Aquarium is in an old warehouse in downtown Dallas and charges $21 for adults and $13 for kids.

http://www.dwazoo.com/d/

The World Aquarium at the City Museum should look into expanding to a stand-alone location downtown, raising prices, and staying private. With just one major draw, like the Shark Tank at Ripley's where you glide on a moving belt through a glass tunnel that winds through the tank, they could thrive. But if they add something new and unique -- even better. How about a place near the river that incorporates a view under the actual river and incorporates the now defunct Admiral somehow. How about including a swimming pool like the one at the Golden Nugget in Vegas.

city museum used to be a non-for-profit and recieved donations including from danforth but it went to for profit after it almost failed because it couldnt raise enough money

Loved the Dallas World Aquarium. Can't say the same for the Dallas Zoo.

I'd like to see an aquarium go into a spot that is not currently being used. A place that would add life to an area, but at the same time be one piece of the puzzle in the area, not the only atraction. If not Downtown, I would not have an issue with a large aquarium being built as part of our world class zoo. I love aquariums and would love to see one in St. Louis, regardless of where in the CITY, it is built. Having it by one of the greatest rivers in the world, seems so logical. (Chouteau's Landing, North of the Landing, East of Soulard etc..) Washington Ave. near City Museum is fine too.

jmstokes wrote:I'm tired of silver bullets - aquariums, theme parks, museums, "districts," etc.

Let's take any money out there and put it toward practical stuff - rehabbing streets, making walkable places, reducing street widths on existing thoroughfares. I don't want to see a thin dime going to stuff like this.

Frankly, I think an aquarium would be a huge money pit and a waste. They work fine in touristy areas, or in a place like Chicago where it's a HUGE destination (alongside the Field Museum and Planetarium).

St. Louis could use more organic growth and less stuff like aquariums.

YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!111onejuan!!!!

jmstokes wrote:I'm still nervous about 14th street in ONSL. I think it was too much, too fast, and virtually no organic growth. Would have loved to have seen that money go more slowly into places.

Yes/No. It depends upon your time horizon. There was a day when Hyde Park (not exactly ONSL, but close) and Soulard weren't all that different as for "up and coming" status. And remember, this is Take Two for the 14th Street strip, except it's being done right this time.

I really can't pinpoint any specific impetus to Soulard's revival (save the magnet of the market and the gay community, which moved on to Soulard and other neighborhoods after pioneering the CWE). The brewery certainly helped as well. But in any event, the revival of ONSL and adjoining neighborhoods has been in process for a very long time.