urbanSTL

Grover wrote:Yet there is no definitive answer to what is most important to a fulfilling life? The urban environment? Quality food? Music? . . .

Stay away from Chesterfield, Applebee's, and Linkin Park, and you'll do just fine.

keef227 wrote:Its just good to see a tower finally going up downtown other than Lumiere Place. If we can get a couple more of these projects off the grownd our skyline will began to fill up a little bit.

kinda frustrating that 3 major new construction projects will have little or NO effect on our skyline (Roberts, Skyhouse, CitySide)... but honestly, filling in these empty blocks and creating a vibrant 24hr dt is much more exciting to me that a more expansive skyline. Idealy I'd like both, but a nice skyline with no substance is of no interest for me.

Don't forget that if Chouteau's Landing gets seen through to fruition, it will have an impact on the southern skyline, farther south of BPV.

^ These are all good points. I keep thinking of the Cleveland skyline with the enormous Key Bank Tower. It's impressive and can be seen from just about anywhere in the metro area, but downtown Cleveland is very, very dead. Having 10,000 jobs in one tower isn't the best way to bring vibrancy to a CBD.

bpe235 wrote:...filling in these empty blocks and creating a vibrant 24hr dt is much more exciting to me that a more expansive skyline. Idealy I'd like both, but a nice skyline with no substance is of no interest for me.

I second that. One of the things I've always loved about Saint Louis is the density of neighborhoods along the Central Corridor, starting with downtown, Midtown, Central West End, Skinker-DeBaliviere, and Clayton. Who needs a taller skyline when there are several skylines with interesting and increasingly dense neighborhoods? I'll be content to see more density in each of these areas, along with an effort to better connect the dots wherever possible.



I'd also love to see the skyline spread out parallel to the river with projects like the Bottle District and Chouteau's Pond. I realize the former project is on-again, off-again, and the latter is merely a vision at this point. At least there's a clear vision for the better and higher use of the land immediately north and south of downtown, something that was sorely lacking just a few years ago.



As we build density and make downtown a more desirable place in which to work, live, and play, the bigger projects, and taller towers will happen sooner or later. Then we'll have a skyline with some extra bling.

^

I agree. The tower addition to the Renaissance is a good recent example of a project that may not have had an effect on the skyline but has improved the streetscape immensely.

JMedwick wrote:^ The potential added by developments like the Park Pacific, the Skyhouse, and the Roberts Tower are reasons I go back and forth on whether downtown really needs the BPV to be mostly residential. There are plenty of other lots around the ballpark not owned by the Cards or Cordish that could be built up as residential towers. If downtown really is on the verge of stepping up to the new construction residential tower phase of its revitalization, then maybe whats best for downtown is that the BPV be office development.

That really does make a lot of sense - how about a Centene HQ on the site of the Bowling HOF? I'd like to see residential immediately outside of the park, with terraces and balconies that look in through centerfield, with office buildings clustered towards the western portion of BPV. Cupples Station is developing into a strong residential district and still has a few lots that could be used for new residential construction, and of course, there's always the big lot on the east side of Broadway, across from the park, which would be great for residential.

^

I just walked by, and no. Ground is being torn up for the plaza though.

bpe235 wrote:

keef227 wrote:Its just good to see a tower finally going up downtown other than Lumiere Place. If we can get a couple more of these projects off the grownd our skyline will began to fill up a little bit.

kinda frustrating that 3 major new construction projects will have little or NO effect on our skyline (Roberts, Skyhouse, CitySide)... but honestly, filling in these empty blocks and creating a vibrant 24hr dt is much more exciting to me that a more expansive skyline. Idealy I'd like both, but a nice skyline with no substance is of no interest for me.

Exactly. Skylines are so overrated. Good for little more than postcards...and STL already has the distinctive Arch.

Does anyone doubt that London or Paris are not huge & wonderful cities? Yet until recently they had no skyline "money shot" w/ tall towers. Just icons like Big Ben, Eiffel Tower, etc. like STL has.

Buildings shouldn't be over 7 floors anyway... no taller than one would be willing to climb up stairs to. What happens during a blackout when you live or work on 30th floor?

^

Duh, base jumping!

Exactly. Skylines are so overrated. Good for little more than postcards...and STL already has the distinctive Arch.

Does anyone doubt that London or Paris are not huge & wonderful cities? Yet until recently they had no skyline "money shot" w/ tall towers. Just icons like Big Ben, Eiffel Tower, etc. like STL has.

Buildings shouldn't be over 7 floors anyway... no taller than one would be willing to climb up stairs to. What happens during a blackout when you live or work on 30th floor?

just a thought....Paris, London, St. Louis....sexy ain't it



I always here on the forum what other domestic cities have done or did and how many towers and stuff they have and how STL could take a note or two, but what I see going on downtown is a lot of different stuff (like Roberts tower-had to get that in here) which could only change the way others look at our city. We have our own character (with projects such as Roberts tower) and I propose if we are going to be recognized, why not be in a class with Paris, London, St. Louis....Cheers

Paris, no coastline, on a major river.



London, no coastline, on a major river.



St. Louis...yeah, you see where I'm going.

As stated before Roberts, Skyhouse, and Cityside will not change the skyline, however Lumiere place will (St. Louis nightlight) and so will BPV ....so many people come to see the arch, but now DT will have so much more to offer including the energy from all the residents....it is hard not to get excited with all the activity that is currently going on.

keef227 wrote:St Louis has had the Arch and the same basic skyline for years and downtown has been dead for years. I believe a bigger skyline will add to the beauty of downtown and I also think when people see buildings going up and patrons in the downtown area it makes the city more attractive to visitors. I don't know how many times people told me that they visited and it seemed boring downtown. I am very excited about the things happening downtown, now we will have even more things to go along with the character and unique look of downtown St Louis.

skyscrapers don't make a downtown any less boring. again, they only look neat from a distance or with your head turned 90 degrees upward.

parking lots & garages w/ no street level activity do make downtowns boring, and often accompany skyscrapers.

Turn skyscrapers on their sides and you'd have dozens of more entries and activity on the street level. They could have people movers you see in airports for faster horizontal travel thru the building, if required.... hey, I'm on to something!

Washington Avenue looks amazing from street-level, but as a skyline, it's boring. The Gateway Mall looks more impressive from the Arch, but it's very dead at street-level. Personally, I'd take horizontal vibrancy over vertical density.

another great iconic city w/ no office tower skyline: Washington DC

Paris, London, DC, St. Louis.... good company.

Towers are only for stroking egos.

Why try to emulate Chicago? Be unique. Downtown Chicago is boring compared to all the surrounding neighborhoods.

New Orleans does have a skyline, but it is the least interesting part of the city architecturally and culturally.

^I disagree, but you're right that it's not iconic of New Orleans, other than the superdome.