1,681
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,681

PostOct 19, 2017#626

Woo! Almost there!

75
New MemberNew Member
75

PostOct 19, 2017#627

Some neat progress photos of the entrance taken during a press site visit this morning

STL Today - Gateway Arch museum, visitors center to open in time for Fair St. Louis
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/new- ... e-latest-1

502
Senior MemberSenior Member
502

PostOct 20, 2017#628

The museum "roof" is completely sodded. Huzzah!!

1,465
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,465

PostOct 21, 2017#629

I'd like to take this opportunity to remind us all that the reason cityarchriver refused to entertain the popular idea of highway removal and replacement with an at-grade blvd was that it could not be completed by 2015, the 50th anniversary of the Arch.

:roll:

5,261
Life MemberLife Member
5,261

PostOct 21, 2017#630

imran wrote:I'd like to take this opportunity to remind us all that the reason cityarchriver refused to entertain the popular idea of highway removal and replacement with an at-grade blvd was that it could not be completed by 2015, the 50th anniversary of the Arch.

:roll:
Well, the 75th anniversary would be a good time to have the highway gone. By then, the definition of urbanism will be different so hopefully on the 65th anniversary they reveal a plan to either cap or remove the highway

1,681
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,681

PostOct 21, 2017#631

imran wrote:
Oct 21, 2017
I'd like to take this opportunity to remind us all that the reason cityarchriver refused to entertain the popular idea of highway removal and replacement with an at-grade blvd was that it could not be completed by 2015, the 50th anniversary of the Arch.

:roll:
Was it not to be on the shoulders of MoDot?

I highly doubt MoDot was going to spend the money to fix the problem, or even acknowledge that it's a problem to begin with. I know, I know, allowing an entire population to drive around your urban core isn't an issue.

3,433
Life MemberLife Member
3,433

PostOct 21, 2017#632

So here is what the Arch Grounds look like from the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park. Now that the grass is over the Museum under the Arch, we can get an idea of how high the bump is compared to before. I believe it is a little higher than the original bump, but not noticeably higher. Looks good.

Arch_Malcomb_Park2 by Gary Kreie, on Flickr

There appear to be wedding pictures in progress today. This is the best web cam of St. Louis -- full realtime video.

https://www.meprd.org/archcam.html

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostOct 22, 2017#633

^Must be one of the Griswold kids getting married.

103
Junior MemberJunior Member
103

PostOct 23, 2017#634

gary kreie wrote:
Oct 21, 2017
So here is what the Arch Grounds look like from the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park. Now that the grass is over the Museum under the Arch, we can get an idea of how high the bump is compared to before. I believe it is a little higher than the original bump, but not noticeably higher. Looks good.

Arch_Malcomb_Park2 by Gary Kreie, on Flickr

There appear to be wedding pictures in progress today. This is the best web cam of St. Louis -- full realtime video.

https://www.meprd.org/archcam.html
The BPV residential tower should provide a nice bump to the lefthand side of our skyline from this view.

6,123
Life MemberLife Member
6,123

PostOct 25, 2017#635

If I did the math right I think it will mostly fill the hole between the Clarion (Stouffer's) and the . . . Deloitte building? (Formerly the MCI building. The green one.) That's pretty close to the shot I used for my little mock-up last fall, and unless they've significantly changed the plan (and I don't believe it's changed much in size or proportion, just finish), I actually did some math to figure out the perspective. It should look just a skosh shorter than Clarion, but it's quite a lot bulkier from that side, so it'll overlap in both directions, principally to the north of the round tower. Won't really add height there, I think. But it will make it fuller. Beefier. Shinier, even. Here's to hoping. :)


2,632
Life MemberLife Member
2,632

PostOct 26, 2017#636

The bump in the grass will be great for the concerts during VP Fair

3,433
Life MemberLife Member
3,433

PostOct 27, 2017#637

Morning in St. Louis.



From STLFromAbove Facebook Page.
https://www.facebook.com/STLFromAbove/

60
New MemberNew Member
60

PostOct 27, 2017#638

Just walked down Memorial Dr, and it’s such an absolute shame that Civic Leaders were so shortsighted to allow an interstate to cut off downtown from the arch grounds. The real estate lining an at grade Memorial Drive would be spectacular and priceless!

4,553
Life MemberLife Member
4,553

PostOct 28, 2017#639

gary kreie wrote: Morning in St. Louis.


This is awesome. Thanks for posting.

1,465
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,465

PostOct 28, 2017#640

bwcrow1s wrote:
Oct 21, 2017
imran wrote:
Oct 21, 2017
I'd like to take this opportunity to remind us all that the reason cityarchriver refused to entertain the popular idea of highway removal and replacement with an at-grade blvd was that it could not be completed by 2015, the 50th anniversary of the Arch.

:roll:
Was it not to be on the shoulders of MoDot?

I highly doubt MoDot was going to spend the money to fix the problem, or even acknowledge that it's a problem to begin with. I know, I know, allowing an entire population to drive around your urban core isn't an issue.
Well, thinking about it, MODOT keeps crying about not having enough $$ to maintain their bloated system. It would've helped them to have one less stretch of redundant highway on their backs. From what I recall it was City arch river that simply refused to engage in the idea of an at grade boulevard. They were all about the 'Lid' despite a very strong grassroots plea for a more valuable long term solution.

Can't quite tell if your comment about driving around the urban core is sarcasm but there is over-whelming evidence/experience that highways cutting through the core do not help communities/cities.

1,681
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,681

PostOct 28, 2017#641

imran wrote:
Oct 28, 2017
bwcrow1s wrote:
Oct 21, 2017
imran wrote:
Oct 21, 2017
I'd like to take this opportunity to remind us all that the reason cityarchriver refused to entertain the popular idea of highway removal and replacement with an at-grade blvd was that it could not be completed by 2015, the 50th anniversary of the Arch.

:roll:
Was it not to be on the shoulders of MoDot?

I highly doubt MoDot was going to spend the money to fix the problem, or even acknowledge that it's a problem to begin with. I know, I know, allowing an entire population to drive around your urban core isn't an issue.
Well, thinking about it, MODOT keeps crying about not having enough $$ to maintain their bloated system. It would've helped them to have one less stretch of redundant highway on their backs. From what I recall it was City arch river that simply refused to engage in the idea of an at grade boulevard. They were all about the 'Lid' despite a very strong grassroots plea for a more valuable long term solution.

Can't quite tell if your comment about driving around the urban core is sarcasm but there is over-whelming evidence/experience that highways cutting through the core do not help communities/cities.
It was sarcasm. It isn't good for Downtown or the surrounding neighborhoods. I mean, the effects are visible just in how neighborhoods were carved away and our population completely fled from the 50's to 70's.

678
Senior MemberSenior Member
678

PostOct 30, 2017#642

bwcrow1s wrote:
Oct 28, 2017
imran wrote:
Oct 28, 2017
bwcrow1s wrote:
Oct 21, 2017


Was it not to be on the shoulders of MoDot?

I highly doubt MoDot was going to spend the money to fix the problem, or even acknowledge that it's a problem to begin with. I know, I know, allowing an entire population to drive around your urban core isn't an issue.
Well, thinking about it, MODOT keeps crying about not having enough $$ to maintain their bloated system. It would've helped them to have one less stretch of redundant highway on their backs. From what I recall it was City arch river that simply refused to engage in the idea of an at grade boulevard. They were all about the 'Lid' despite a very strong grassroots plea for a more valuable long term solution.

Can't quite tell if your comment about driving around the urban core is sarcasm but there is over-whelming evidence/experience that highways cutting through the core do not help communities/cities.
It was sarcasm. It isn't good for Downtown or the surrounding neighborhoods. I mean, the effects are visible just in how neighborhoods were carved away and our population completely fled from the 50's to 70's.
I keep thinking about this with the Amazon proposal. They want to put them on the Riverfront but just wait till they see how cut off it is from the urban core.

3,433
Life MemberLife Member
3,433

PostNov 11, 2017#643

Nice new drone shot of the Arch by a New York photographer who looks for great scenes all over the World. Stephen Barna.

https://www.facebook.com/barnadrift/


1,155
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,155

PostNov 13, 2017#644

Has anyone contacted them to ask if/when the path to the south of the new entrance is opening? It looks like they've been trying to get the access point open, they just need to finish a few details and move the construction fence. I've never contacted them before and wanted to check here before e-mailing them.

3,433
Life MemberLife Member
3,433

PostNov 30, 2017#645

Looks like all the sod is in now around the new Arch entrance.


1,155
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,155

PostNov 30, 2017#646

Really pisses me off that they haven't prioritized getting the south side of the cap open. They've been finishing all this surface work with no apparent priorities to reopen access to downtown. The only possible exception being the priority to reconnect to the Landing.

I was seriously expecting them to set up a construction fence and open up the path to the right in this image.

1,878
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,878

PostDec 04, 2017#647

gary kreie wrote:
Nov 30, 2017
Looks like all the sod is in now around the new Arch entrance.

I hereby dub thee 'the uvula'.

-RBB

3,433
Life MemberLife Member
3,433

PostDec 04, 2017#648

On their Facebook page, I asked when one of the sidewalks from Luther Ely Smith park past the new entrance to an Arch leg will open. They replied they are shooting for Spring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1,155
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,155

PostDec 05, 2017#649

gary kreie wrote:
Dec 04, 2017
On their Facebook page, I asked when one of the sidewalks from Luther Ely Smith park past the new entrance to an Arch leg will open. They replied they are shooting for Spring.
If anyone wants to go throw eggs at the 7th floor of One Memorial Drive with me, meet me down there at 10:00 a.m. today.
I'm sorry, but this is a huge stain on the tourist experience here. Downtown is bad enough as it is (speaking as a DT resident and worker). Every single time I walk down to Luther Ely Smith, I end up telling some very lost group of people how to get to the other side of the highway. Literally every single time.

1,864
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,864

PostDec 05, 2017#650

Seriously. I get blocking off the sidewalks during major construction for safety reasons, but this just seems excessive. The longer they wait to reopen the connections, the more bad experiences tourists will have. I'm sure tourist traffic will rebound eventually but why delay it and allow for bad experiences to continue? Seems like typical STL to me... extend projects for an absurd length of time, don't communicate what's going on, and then toss out a arbitrary time frame once people start asking questions.

Read more posts (294 remaining)