Near North Riverfront

sc4mayor · PostDec 19, 2020#512020-12-19T01:26+00:00

Ashley Energy is exploring an “energy and technology” district surrounding their plant just north of downtown:
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... NYYi13AG7c

St. Louis Alderwoman Tammika Hubbard said in a letter this month that the company, Ashley Energy LLC, could create a district "highly suitable for biopharma companies, enterprise level data centers, and related energy and agriculture-oriented end users." She said plans call for $200 million in new projects and the creation of at least 100 jobs.

The St. Louis Port Authority this week OK'd a measure calling for Ashley to pay for costs related to negotiating a development agreement at the site, bordered by the Mississippi River on the east, Biddle Street on the south, Collins Street on the west and Mullanphy Street on the north.

But SLDC is most interested in the possibility of developing the blighted area. Williams said Ashley could reinvest insurance proceeds received after its plant sustained significant flood damage last year. Williams referenced a plan for the area unveiled in 2015, which envisioned parks, nature trails and new residential and commercial buildings, with expanded renovation from the Arch grounds to the Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge. The Near North Riverfront had been targeted for a new stadium for the National Football League's Rams before the team left for Los Angeles in 2016.

"Ashley is doing a piece of what was the plan without the stadium, which is the innovation hub," Williams said. He said the development could fit well with redevelopment activity occurring in nearby Laclede's Landing.

Sizable chunk of real estate:

Elek.borrelli · PostDec 19, 2020#522020-12-19T02:17+00:00

Imma just leave these here

chriss752 · PostDec 19, 2020#532020-12-19T08:29+00:00

I have many questions about this. Biggest one being... why is the Energy company pushing for this? Second... just why? Were already have Cortex, 39North, and the slow-going North of Washington District (anchored by Square). We don't need, in my opinion, another innovation and technology district. Lets continue investing in what we have. Make the North Riverfront a residential-focused neighborhood.

And if Ashley Energy is serious, how about cleaning up their building and property a bit. It's dumpy as is.

gary kreie · PostDec 19, 2020#542020-12-19T14:25+00:00

I might have agreed until I saw what Boston did with Seaport. Their innovation area was Route 128 and still is. But then they started developing Seaport near downtown. In 1982 the old fish warehouse area was completely moribund. Then, after the big dig and cleaned up harbor, the Feds built a new Federal Courthouse in the 1990s on a pier near the planned conventions center.

From On the Waterfront: An Oral History of the Seaport, "In addition to the construction of the John Joseph Moakley Federal Courthouse at Fan Pier and a new convention center, Anthony Athanas partnered with Chicago’s Pritzker family (the billionaire founders of the Hyatt hotel chain) to develop the land around his restaurant."

First photo is from 1982. Second Photo is from 2017.

My brother works in the Seaport area. He reports businesses are moving to Seaport from the suburbs. I think St. Louis can similarly handle having a few corporations from Chesterfield moving to a new business/restaurant/housing district near everything going on downtown with views the Arch and an active river.

sc4mayor · PostDec 19, 2020#552020-12-19T16:00+00:00

^^ Innovation/Technology district aside...I think anyone wanting to come in and redevelop this moribund area of the waterfront is fine with me. My guess Ashley is leading it because they’re the primary tenant down there right now.

All we have is the BJ article...so we’ll see if any “innovation” district pans out...but getting a redevelopment in line with GRG’s plans from several years ago, which does seem to be SLDC’s angle here, is good news to me.

pattimagee · PostDec 19, 2020#562020-12-19T19:56+00:00

I would wager we don't really have much in the name of energy innovation, although I'm not necessarily in tune with that market?

Could being on the river maybe has something to do with the Mississippi River? (15th largest river in the world discharging 16,792 cubic meters (593,003 cubic feet) of water per second into the Gulf of Mexico)

symphonicpoet · PostDec 20, 2020#572020-12-20T08:33+00:00

^Bio-energy is a thing. I'm not sure it's a great thing, but it's a thing. I could see local leadership pushing ethanol or bio-diesel. Maybe evensome kind of biologically generated methane as a substitute for natural gas. (Ideally involving pigs, since we've got lots of those too.) "Innovation cage match tonight at the Wonderdome! Two geeks enter! One geek leaves!" Hold 'em over at the Chase, maybe. There's some history there. Or at Union Station. Given our exposure to lowest hanging sector of the energy industry, coal, I could very much see where we need some innovation. And there's certainly room for creative use of agricultural byproducts and bio-engineered products.

stlhistory · PostDec 20, 2020#582020-12-20T12:53+00:00

I have many questions about this. Biggest one being... why is the Energy company pushing for this? Second... just why?

Ashley operates the natural gas downtown loop of steam power, which has been losing customers steadily since the 1990s. They need to encourage end-users, or else the high fixed costs aren't spread over enough customers to make the system viable. City of St. Louis is a major user of the system, so they're incentivized to keep the loop operational and cheap. They need data centers, or basically anyone who is going to use a lot of heat and electricity.

chris fuller · PostJan 09, 2021#592021-01-09T18:36+00:00

The Failed Promise of the St. Louis Riverfront – and How We May Yet Achieve It
https://missouri-metro.com/2021/01/08/s ... ntpromise/

dredger · PostJan 10, 2021#602021-01-10T03:04+00:00

stlhistory wrote: ↑
Dec 20, 2020
I have many questions about this. Biggest one being... why is the Energy company pushing for this? Second... just why?
Ashley operates the natural gas downtown loop of steam power, which has been losing customers steadily since the 1990s. They need to encourage end-users, or else the high fixed costs aren't spread over enough customers to make the system viable. City of St. Louis is a major user of the system, so they're incentivized to keep the loop operational and cheap. They need data centers, or basically anyone who is going to use a lot of heat and electricity.

My believe is St. Louis and Missouri for the most part missed out on the Data Center boom. Why? all the big players from Amazon to Facebook want green energy to fuel the data centers and the states that did land them are delivering whether its Texas (wind power) or Carolinas (a slew of new solar farms announced to go along with a major Facebook data center expansion). MO and its residents have done everything they can to stop the grainbelt express, a high powered voltage line intended to deliver northern plains renewable wind energy to Midwest cities. Amazon probably did their research and wonder how MO could ever deliver if they won't let renewable energy even come into the state.

However the biogas idea seems like a vision worth pursuing more then ever with St. Louis central location and access to lock free, ice free inland river system providing cheap transport of bio materials and end products.

On a different note, the renderings above seem to show a lot of parkland development or simply more green space. I'm I missing something? If I'm correct, wouldn't it be better if private land continues to sits idle and fill back in organically? To have half of the space become just more green space for the sake of landing one or two more infills in the short seems like the wrong direction to go.

sc4mayor · PostJan 10, 2021#612021-01-10T05:47+00:00

^ The renderings above were created by a user here and do not represent in any way the plans for this area.

eee123 · PostJan 10, 2021#622021-01-10T17:12+00:00

The pandemic era has given me a lot of time to aimlessly walk around.

Just off Broadway (at Wright Street?), there's some kind of on-street chop-shop/salvage yard operation. You can even see where oil has drained straight into storm drains.

Just next door to this, at 2923 N. Broadway, is a city office, which looks like Community Development.

There's a smaller on-street chop shop in the 1600 block of N. 7th, visible from Broadway. Both remind me of Doctores in Mexico City, which is notorious for that and is best avoided.

That's in addition to the frequent burned-out cars (three since the pandemic began that I've seen), the wrecked and abandoned cars left for weeks, and the trash everywhere.

Does the city just not care? Is there a remedy besides me seemingly being the only guy to report everything to CSB, then follow up four times before anything happens?

Another burned-out car still sits behind a McKee property (across I-70, technically in Old North), nine days after the "tow by" date, another part removed every day. Not sure if they're just behind on those tow notices, or they have an awful system with no mandatory follow-up.

MattnSTL · PostJan 10, 2021#632021-01-10T21:44+00:00

eee123 wrote: ↑
Jan 10, 2021
Just next door to this, at 2923 N. Broadway, is a city office, which looks like Community Development.

Building Division. Some inspectors along with the lead abatement program work out of there.

dredger · PostJan 11, 2021#642021-01-11T02:29+00:00

sc4mayor wrote: ↑
Jan 10, 2021
^ The renderings above were created by a user here and do not represent in any way the plans for this area.

thanks for the clarification

eee123 · PostJan 31, 2021#652021-01-31T16:59+00:00

What purpose did the pedestrian overpass over I-70 at North Market originally serve? I walked it 24 hours after the snow ended the other day, and it was apparent nobody had used it since then.

The old Webster school is on the west (Old North) side, but what was on the east? Was that area more residential at one point?

The fact that MoDot was able to justify spending money to replace it a couple years ago strikes me as very odd. It's a block from another overpass and apparently unused.

quincunx · PostJan 31, 2021#662021-01-31T17:10+00:00

Probably so neighborhood residents could walk to work. But now eVeRyOnE dRiVeS.

MattnSTL · PostJan 31, 2021#672021-01-31T17:50+00:00

Way back in 2010 MODOT proposed removing the pedestrian bridge entirely. But before doing that they mailed a survey to the surrounding neighborhood and came to a neighborhood meeting, and feedback was to keep it. Being two blocks west, I'm very much in favor of keeping any connectivity over the massive barrier that destroyed the area. I'm sure there was a lot more use when I-70 was new and there were more residents and industry that said residents were likely to walk to for work, but the bridge still gets a fair amount of use. Like bike lanes, just because you don't see people using it, especially in cold and snowy conditions, doesn't mean people don't ever. I walked across it myself just two weeks ago. I'm absolutely in favor of any piddly pedestrian funding we can get, especially in North St. Louis. The new bridge is much more user friendly and ADA accessible. The old bridge had crumbling steps that could barely be navigated. Now it's a gentle, if long ramp.

To the question of if the east side of I-70 was more residential- yes, quite a bit. It was an interesting mix between I-70 and Broadway, as that was a cohesive neighborhood with the rest of what is now distinct as Old North. Most of the evidence of that has been wiped away over time, but you can still find a few residential buildings standing, but vacant. Even just ten years ago there was quite a bit more residential standing than now.

eee123 · PostJan 31, 2021#682021-01-31T18:26+00:00

Interesting. I'm not disparaging it. I'm pro-pedestrian infrastructure, too.

Just seemed odd to me, since the area to the east is not real dense in jobs and that bridge saves just two blocks walking. If after the original was demolished, we had money to build one new pedestrian bridge over an interstate in the city, ranking potential traffic and pedestrian-route savings, that one would presumably rank behind dozens of other locations.

Just a curious location and curious that it's new in an area pockmarked with decay. And I've walked it plenty in warmer months. Never see any pedestrians over there on that or the nearby street bridge.

quincunx · PostJan 31, 2021#692021-01-31T18:43+00:00

I figure 60 years ago there were a lot more residents on ine side and a lot mor jobs on the other.

eee123 · PostFeb 01, 2021#702021-02-01T00:50+00:00

quincunx wrote: ↑
Jan 31, 2021
I figure 60 years ago there were a lot more residents on ine side and a lot mor jobs on the other.

Obviously, but the rebuilding is my main curiosity.
It is a strange expenditure for a broke highway department when it seems like there can't be more than a single-digit number of people for whom it shortens their route. You'd have to live directly west of it and work directly east of it. If either home or work was two blocks north or south, the overpass doesn't shorten anything.

quincunx · PostMar 21, 2021#712021-03-21T03:15+00:00

There's a demo permit for 2622 N Broadway, the one story building in the streetview image above. Says partially collapsed, so probably collateral damage from the fire.

PostAug 30, 2021#722021-08-30T15:31+00:00

$500k building permit issued for 2622 N Broadway for retail sales, commercial building per plans.

saumikn · PostAug 30, 2021#732021-08-30T18:26+00:00

I went biking along the Riverfront Trail for the first time yesterday, and there's some construction project going on around Carr St which blocks the trail completely, so there's no way to go farther north. What are they building there, and is there any way to go around?

Also the riverfront as a whole seems very blank. There's a ton of space directly along the river, but it's just covered in sand. One area was being used as a makeshift parking lot for a river cruise company, but the rest was just empty. Is there any reason why this area doesn't get paved and used as a riverfront plaza? I'm thinking something along the lines of what Chicago has on the lakefront near downtown. I've read there are some issues with flooding, but I wouldn't think that is an issue for most of the year.

eee123 · PostAug 30, 2021#742021-08-30T20:59+00:00

saumikn wrote: ↑
Aug 30, 2021
I went biking along the Riverfront Trail for the first time yesterday, and there's some construction project going on around Carr St which blocks the trail completely, so there's no way to go farther north. What are they building there, and is there any way to go around?

It's been a couple months since I've been up there, but I assume the Carr floodwall is still closed, as it has been for most of the past few years. Then Ashley Energy perpetually has the road closed for construction storage.

You can bypass via First, Second or Broadway to O'Fallon.

It seems like the Riverfront Trail-Arch trail has been open like 10% of the time since the Arch renovations. Frustrated cyclists run into that constantly, I'm sure. And there's no signage.

From Downtown West, I just take 20th north and enter the trail at Branch. It's easier and avoids a ton of stoplights.

I guess we have to start a Gofundme to get proper detour signage and/or an open floodwall and Ashley to find a different place to store their supplies.

GoHarvOrGoHome · PostAug 31, 2021#752021-08-31T14:58+00:00

quincunx wrote: ↑
Aug 30, 2021
$500k building permit issued for 2622 N Broadway for retail sales, commercial building per plans.

Is the sex toy store just rebuilding I assume?

Near North Riverfront

Choose Display Mode