Revving up in St. Louis: from MayorSlay.com: City DESA authority set
- 10K
Great to hear that we're going to take advantage of this development tool.
Could money from MoDESA be used for things like streetscape improvements?
Could money from MoDESA be used for things like streetscape improvements?
^ I think Deb brings up a great point. I wonder what sorts of projects the city will choose to use the money for. I mean, infastructure is a broad term. Streetscape improvements I would think will qualify. But maybe improvements like the lids of I-70 or improvements along the riverfront will be allowed. And I am always for imrpoved parking tech. 
From MayorSlay.com: First proposed MoDESA project will get a hearing.
I personally think this is huge! Streetscapes are really lacking downtown and when revitalized add so much. Just look at what the infrastructure improvements did for Washington Ave. If only we could use the funds to buy out Larry Rice . . .
It is good to see that the city may start using the MODESA funds as a source of funding to get complicated projects off the ground, in particular new construction. It is also good to see work on streetscapes. Using the monies on the park south of the Park Pacific, however, is a waste of money.
Using the monies on the park south of the Park Pacific, however, is a waste of money.
If you were re-doing the Tucker streetscape and expected the Park Pacific complex to draw new residents and uses, why would you ignore that greenspace?
^ Because that greenspace is better used as a development site, leaving the block bounded by Chestnut, tucker, 13th, and Market for greenspace.
Face it. Those block-sized parks around the Soldier's Memorial will never be built on. I can't imagine anyone except a few die-hards on this forum that would suggest destroying parkland in the central city. It ain't gonna happen! At least not as long as there are innumerable parking lots all over downtown.
This is great. It always frustrated me that the Marriott Rennaissance and others didn't build their streetscape on Wash Ave to match the new stuff west of Tucker. I thought that was the idea.
- 10K
The west of Tucker streetscape improvements were always supposed to differ from the streetscape to the east, at least that's been my understanding.
I do think it's very important that all streetscape improvements be coordinated. For instance, the Marquette Building now has spiffy new historic replica lighting fixtures, which in no way resemble any of the other fixtures on Broadway. Hopefully, the rest of Broadway will eventually share the same fixtures.
Also, Olive has cool tree planters which can't be found anywhere else downtown (at least not that I can think of) - it would be great to see them elswhere as well.
I do think it's very important that all streetscape improvements be coordinated. For instance, the Marquette Building now has spiffy new historic replica lighting fixtures, which in no way resemble any of the other fixtures on Broadway. Hopefully, the rest of Broadway will eventually share the same fixtures.
Also, Olive has cool tree planters which can't be found anywhere else downtown (at least not that I can think of) - it would be great to see them elswhere as well.
I guess I was hoping the Wash Ave Streetscape would extend down to Broadway (Eads Bridge/Landing) thus creating a visual cue to connect convention center/hotel to nightlife/destinations.
- 6,775
shadrach wrote:I guess I was hoping the Wash Ave Streetscape would extend down to Broadway (Eads Bridge/Landing) thus creating a visual cue to connect convention center/hotel to nightlife/destinations.
A bit off topic, but as I sat at the light at Washington and 4th Sunday morning, it was apparant how ghastly that Stl Center/Dillards bridge is. Without it, there will be a great view all the way up Washington.
BTW, are there renderings/guidelines of the new streetscape plan?
Wasn't Kiku Obata working on that?
Wasn't Kiku Obata working on that?
I like that the Washington streetscape west of Tucker is different, as it marks the area a distinct. I hope the streetscape improvements that have followed other projects were guided by an overall streetscape plan, otherwise who knows what sort of hoge-poge of stuff the city will get.
Sadly, you are likely right Framer, as our city leaders seem blind to the harm lifeless green space can do to a city. I would argue an empty park can do more harm than does a parking lot. Odd I know, but really, at least with a parking lot folks can park there, resulting in pedestrian traffic in and out of the site. With the overgrown parks on the gateway mall, you see no pedestrian activity. A true void. Trimming the trees, paving new sidewalks, and better lighting isn't why folks don't use those parks. It is because there is NOTHING around them and the park pacific isn't going to change that reality.
Face it. Those block-sized parks around the Soldier's Memorial will never be built on. I can't imagine anyone except a few die-hards on this forum that would suggest destroying parkland in the central city. It ain't gonna happen! At least not as long as there are innumerable parking lots all over downtown.
Sadly, you are likely right Framer, as our city leaders seem blind to the harm lifeless green space can do to a city. I would argue an empty park can do more harm than does a parking lot. Odd I know, but really, at least with a parking lot folks can park there, resulting in pedestrian traffic in and out of the site. With the overgrown parks on the gateway mall, you see no pedestrian activity. A true void. Trimming the trees, paving new sidewalks, and better lighting isn't why folks don't use those parks. It is because there is NOTHING around them and the park pacific isn't going to change that reality.