urbanSTL

St. Louis City is never going to sprout San Francisco or New York-level density. Not every corner is going to have a 6+ story building. 

Our problem in St. Louis is that we all too often have dead green space. Lots of green space that has no purpose, doesn't get used, and actually subtracts from vibrancy. 

Long story short, I don't mind green space, so long as it's useful green space. 

If St. Louis was able to construct more green space that people used, and that you saw people using, I'd never complain about it.

TopGolf feels like it can immediately step in and be a fun playground for people in the area. This should be an absolute boon for the Steelcote and Iron Hill areas, bringing awareness, foot traffic, and, in the end, I think it will bring businesses. 

Another green space business that I'd be thrilled to see St. Louis get is Bar K, a bar & dog park concept in Kansas City that has been rumored to be looking to expand into St. Louis. It was rumored to be going into the redevelopment of McRee Ave. between Kingshighway and Vandeventer, but I'm not sure if it is or not anymore. 

KansasCitian wrote: ↑

Nov 22, 2019

TopGolf feels like it can immediately step in and be a fun playground for people in the area. This should be an absolute boon for the Steelcote and Iron Hill areas, bringing awareness, foot traffic, and, in the end, I think it will bring businesses. 

It may be a boon for the area around Steelcote , if there is a pedestrian-friendly space between the two, but not for Iron Hill, unless they dramatically alter their plans for that site.

If this development occurs, my main concern is that they will put a large fenced-in or walled surface parking lot on the west side of the Top Golf property, between the clubhouse and Steelcote, thus destroying any hopes for tying the activity generated into development of a larger neighborhood.

KansasCitian wrote: ↑

Nov 22, 2019

St. Louis City is never going to sprout San Francisco or New York-level density. Not every corner is going to have a 6+ story building.

sure, but i'd settle for Baltimore (~7000 ppsm) or Minneapolis (~7000 ppsm) or Washington (11,000 ppsm) level density, all of which are appreciably more walkable than St. Louis. Hell, somehow even Denver is more walkable than St. Louis. i feel like the central corridor is our best hope for stitching the city back together to some extent, so not sure it's a good idea to build golf courses there, but whatevs. i'm sure lots of people will drive to it until it falls out of fashion.

I'm not a fan of Top Golf. I know it's a big attraction, but they're just so damn ugly. Really mucks up the cityscape IMO.

One of the main reasons I don’t mind the location it is is going up against the rail yard/train tracks. Not many things will probably want to be by them so this works out well. Maybe it will even hide them a bit. It is landlocked or whatever word we want to use on one side so it isn’t like we are putting this in the middle of a block with plenty of room on all sides. It is kind of an ugly area to begin with so it’s a good spot imo. Isn’t detracting from the area like it could in other spots.

jshank83 wrote: ↑

Nov 23, 2019

One of the main reasons I don’t mind the location it is is going up against the rail yard/train tracks. Not many things will probably want to be by them so this works out well. Maybe it will even hide them a bit. It is landlocked or whatever word we want to use on one side so it isn’t like we are putting this in the middle of a block with plenty of room on all sides. It is kind of an ugly area to begin with so it’s a good spot imo. Isn’t detracting from the area like it could in other spots.

This is 100% correct.

That highway/rail corridor is a giant gash through the city. And there's almost nothing we can reasonably expect to be done to fix that anytime soon.

Even if instead of TopGolf, we got the most urban mixed-use attraction possible there, nobody's walking over any of those overpasses between Grand and Tucker. It's not going to be urban or walkable no matter what, unless driving becomes unaffordable or something.

When I hung out at Union Station on the regular I used to park on the north edge of Lafayette Square and walk across all the time for the simple reason that I'm too cheap to pay downtown parking. I've always been a park at the edge and walk in guy when I was able. (Parked in Chouteau's Landing and walked to the arch a few times too. Or up past the power plant and walk down.) That said, I will gladly admit I'm a bit weird. Since I consider rail yards a destination attraction anyway and all that jazz.

^ Not the only weird one, I get a great bird's eye view of the BNSF Richmond rail yard out here in Cali before I cross the Richmond-San Rafael bridge on way to work and another great view of the Port of Richmond heading home.   The only issue with view of port is I also get a view of competitors crane boom tips as part of it.  But as long as our cranes our working and I get to look at the competitor sit I have some job security or at least know who to ask for a job if things flip 

Another consideration is how it is sited, if built near steelcote development, as it relates to future greenway corridor development.  Yes, their is rail and industrial but also a future greenway to be built and developments having some great connections from Downtown, Arch grounds to Forest Park..  That is one of my biggest grips of Iron Hill and how the long linear garage creates its own perceived wall to the future greenway corridor in my opinion

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Nov 23, 2019

When I hung out at Union Station on the regular I used to park on the north edge of Lafayette Square and walk across all the time for the simple reason that I'm too cheap to pay downtown parking. I've always been a park at the edge and walk in guy when I was able. (Parked in Chouteau's Landing and walked to the arch a few times too. Or up past the power plant and walk down.) That said, I will gladly admit I'm a bit weird. Since I consider rail yards a destination attraction anyway and all that jazz.

Same. I'll sometimes walk the 1-ish miles from Downtown West down 18th to Lafayette Square. But it's just so extremely unpleasant and uninviting.  I'd rather walk 2-3x as far to the west.

Walking those overpasses, you're likely to only encounter unsavory characters, in addition to lots of speeding traffic.

Irrational as it may be, this story is lodged in my mind walking on those overpasses downtown.

ST. LOUIS • A man found early Monday with broken legs along railroad tracks in downtown St. Louis early Monday had apparently been robbed and pushed off an overpass, police said.

The man, 20, told police he was walking on an overpass in the 600 block of South 14th Street about 12:45 a.m. when three men approached him and asked him about drugs, police said. One of the three men punched him and rifled through his pockets. When the three robbers found nothing valuable, one of them pushed the man off the overpass to the tracks below.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/cri ... 5.amp.html

eee123 wrote: ↑

Nov 23, 2019

jshank83 wrote: ↑

Nov 23, 2019

One of the main reasons I don’t mind the location it is is going up against the rail yard/train tracks. Not many things will probably want to be by them so this works out well. Maybe it will even hide them a bit. It is landlocked or whatever word we want to use on one side so it isn’t like we are putting this in the middle of a block with plenty of room on all sides. It is kind of an ugly area to begin with so it’s a good spot imo. Isn’t detracting from the area like it could in other spots.

This is 100% correct.

That highway/rail corridor is a giant gash through the city. And there's almost nothing we can reasonably expect to be done to fix that anytime soon.

Even if instead of TopGolf, we got the most urban mixed-use attraction possible there, nobody's walking over any of those overpasses between Grand and Tucker. It's not going to be urban or walkable no matter what, unless driving becomes unaffordable or something.

i mean, we don't need the highway/train yards to be gone in order to make those overpasses more hospitable for pedestrians. similar scars exist in other cities and people still walk around. widen the sidewalks, erect protective barriers between sidewalk and street, and install bright lighting, planters, and tall, decorative fencing so you can't get pushed off (like the Grand overpass except done well). really, regional government (city, county, and state) just has no interest in making life better for pedestrians in St. Louis, outside of a few small islands.

urban_dilettante wrote: ↑

Nov 23, 2019

eee123 wrote: ↑

Nov 23, 2019

jshank83 wrote: ↑

Nov 23, 2019

One of the main reasons I don’t mind the location it is is going up against the rail yard/train tracks. Not many things will probably want to be by them so this works out well. Maybe it will even hide them a bit. It is landlocked or whatever word we want to use on one side so it isn’t like we are putting this in the middle of a block with plenty of room on all sides. It is kind of an ugly area to begin with so it’s a good spot imo. Isn’t detracting from the area like it could in other spots.

This is 100% correct.

That highway/rail corridor is a giant gash through the city. And there's almost nothing we can reasonably expect to be done to fix that anytime soon.

Even if instead of TopGolf, we got the most urban mixed-use attraction possible there, nobody's walking over any of those overpasses between Grand and Tucker. It's not going to be urban or walkable no matter what, unless driving becomes unaffordable or something.

i mean, we don't need the highway/train yards to be gone in order to make those overpasses more hospitable for pedestrians. similar scars exist in other cities and people still walk around. widen the sidewalks, erect protective barriers between sidewalk and street, and install bright lighting, planters, and tall, decorative fencing so you can't get pushed off (like the Grand overpass except done well). really, regional government (city, county, and state) just has no interest in making life better for pedestrians in St. Louis, outside of a few small islands.

My point is, there's not a whole lot we could do to get much more than a couple weirdos like us walking there.  It'll always be a long (for midwesterners), boring stretch of walking. Those solutions also don't address the fact that it's like trekking across the Sahara in summer, what with the total lack of shade.

Anything more than 1/4 to 1/2 a mile walk is considered almost insane, marathon walking for so many people,

A neighbor once complained to me about the lack of parking at Culinaria. Google says it's a 14-minute walk from my building. Why anyone would drive there is beyond me. Once you get in your car and drive up into their garage, you're not even saving any time.

We could hope TopGolf would follow the OnCore design for urban landscapes, but probably not.

https://wben.radio.com/articles/oncore- ... evelopment

^ that might actually be worse. at street level it's just a huge parking lot.

^All of that, plus the city needs to think long-term and plan for, encourage, and provide incentives for new development which is constructed elevated, and adjacent to and abutting those viaducts.  This has been done elsewhere, and there is no reason why it can't be done in St. Louis.  There is only one small stretch along most of these viaducts that passes over railroad tracks or other property that can't be developed over the long-term.  This would allow for something resembling a streetscape with retail space and intersections with signaled crosswalks, and provide more room for those widened sidewalks and shade trees along long stretches of each viaduct.  

The key is to at least break up the unpleasant, desolate 3/4 mile-long stretches of sidewalk instead of encouraging the speedway by erecting 200' tall nets, or the Iron Hill solution, which makes the situation even worse by erecting 10' to 25' high landscaped barriers and retaining walls along Grand.

chaifetz10 wrote: ↑

Nov 24, 2019

The difference here is that these alternative ideas aren’t actual proposals from developers or companies.  I’d love if there was enough demand to make every corner a 5 story mixed use building with street retail BUT that’s just not realistic.   This location is fine for Top Golf and it will help bring more people into the city and to this area.  It’s not as if the developer is proposing demolishing some existing retail block for parking - or another QT.

There are actual proposals from developers along at least three of these viaducts right now that I can think of; in some cases multiple proposals.  But there is no plan by the city, or seemingly even any interest, to try to encourage the long-term goal of transforming them, so each and every one of these developments is not only a missed opportunity, but a future impediment.

chaifetz10 wrote: ↑

Nov 25, 2019

Are any of these for this particular parcel of Chouteau?  Unless these other developers are actively pursuing plans for this stretch of Compton / Chouteau - and they're realistic proposals that aren't 10+ years away to seeing actual build out, then I don't see why Top Golf can't work here.  My point is that there are literally dozens to hundreds of possible lots and buildings within even a mile radius, and that this isn't some travesty like demolishing a historic structure for a QT or Walgreens.  Why are we being so critical of this investment, especially if it will help draw people who can support other new developments like visiting the Foundry or the Steelcote district?  Is it an ideal use in the eyes of us here on UrbanSTL?  Nope.  But is it still a pretty good investment that will help change the image of this area to the "average" St. Louis resident?  Almost certainly.  

I am not critical of the Top Golf concept or that use for this site.  I am critical of the city for not having a plan in place for sites like this or the will to encourage developers and other stakeholders to consider the interests of the city in the project design, rather than just their ROI.  

With a bit of creativity and flexibility on the part of the developer, even a project such as Top Golf could improve the Compton Avenue viaduct and the Chouteau streetscape.  But neither is remotely likely because nobody will even request that.  So instead we will be left with another large, ugly, fenced-in surface parking lot somewhere along Chouteau and Edwin, or worst case, the corner of Compton / Chouteau; anywhere but the best place for the city and surrounding neighborhood, which would be the north side of the lot, next to the rail yard...

Hopefully someone is assisting the existing business find a new location in the city. Not an aesthetically pleasing use, but they seem to be successful in contributing to property, sales, and earnings tax: