urbanSTL

St. Louis City must encourage development on the Eastside. We all would like to see a vibrant downtown and the CBD is the only area that offers the building stock for needed density. But, looks at the maps. Our CDB is handicapped in a big, big way. The location relative to population puts it square in suburbia!



I couldn't figure out how to save/post the images so you'll have to delve into the links - the maps are very illustrative. If you zoom in, density is illustrated block by block - otherwise the densities are too generic and seem very similar from city to city.



St. Louis: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... oomlevel=7



Indianapolis: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... x69487&z=1



Cincinnati: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... x69532&z=1



Chicago: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... x69436&z=1

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:

Gary Kreie wrote:

steve wrote:^I agree.



I wish Ted Drewes would open up a place downtown. There looks like there used to be a walk-up ice cream place on Chestnut, next to Caleco's. I always thought that would be a great location. Eating Ted Drewes custard on Kiener Plaza just before or after a Card's game--how much more St. Louis can you get?



Hopefully, he'll open up a spot in the BPV. Please, Ted, just one more store![/list]

The end of the Metro Link line at Shrewsbury (Landowne at River Des Peres) is surprisingly close to Ted Drews on Chippewa. Only 0.6 miles to be exact according to this web site:



http://www.glennmccartney.com/Projects/ ... alculator/



Someone needs to start a Drewes shuttle, or a carriage ride, or Segway rental between the station and the custard place.

Or they could take 5 minutes and walk.

Of course. I assumed walking was obvious and didn't require stating. There is a street sort of angled right towards TDs. And after eating custard, one could use a short walk to give back some of the calories.



The people who live right behind Ted Drews require front doors as big as garage doors -- did you ever notice? Those are the front doors facing TDs aren't they?

Ihnen wrote:St. Louis City must encourage development on the Eastside. We all would like to see a vibrant downtown and the CBD is the only area that offers the building stock for needed density. But, looks at the maps. Our CDB is handicapped in a big, big way. The location relative to population puts it square in suburbia!



I couldn't figure out how to save/post the images so you'll have to delve into the links - the maps are very illustrative. If you zoom in, density is illustrated block by block - otherwise the densities are too generic and seem very similar from city to city.



St. Louis: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... oomlevel=7



Indianapolis: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... x69487&z=1



Cincinnati: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... x69532&z=1



Chicago: http://www.dataplace.org/map/index.html ... x69436&z=1

This is easier said than done.



First of all, the problem starts with the river itself. The place where St. Louis was founded, is on a narrow part of the Mississippi, which means it goes pretty deep and moves fast. It also makes it prone to flooding, and the East side as a whole is a low lying area.



I think there are engineering measures that could make the land less likely to flood out during very large 500 year floods, but then that marks the second problem. Creating density in an area that has incredible economic problems. There has to be a lure for developers. That lure also has to overcome to simple stigma that is East St. Louis. ESTL has a horrible reputation.



Here's how I think development on that side of the river could really take off (this is taking away the already great areas that are farther east and north of ESTL):



1. Downtown East St. Louis becomes the epicenter of the St. Louis clubbing scene. Since the clubs have died down elsewhere, and for the most part, nightlife nabes are getting away from the 'college' crowd, this could really take off. I think this part of the idea would benefit from a MetroLink line to SIUE, to connect all of the larger Universities in the area. Also, keep those places open later.



2. With the Club scene starting to thrive, you open up the other Warehouses for light development, allowing raw space for young artists, and such to move in. Keeping the rents down, making sure young innovative people can be intrigued enough to live there.



Now that you've changed the image of downtown ESTL, you can start to develop the rest of ESTL. Including more movement towards the river.



But the riverfront is also blemished by things like the Cargill plant, and the railroad tracks, not to mention the Casino Queen and their massive parking lot.



The positives? The street grid of ESTL is still in tact, and looking great. It's very connectible (connectable?). The highways do slice things up a little bit, but the core of the area is still intact. So any new development would have to consider those issues.



And the final problem, St. Louis needs to move past the idea of the OTHER side of the river. We need to be more of one community.

Great input, Trent

Instead of $650M for the new Richland, I wish the effort/development dollars could be focused on East St. Louis - as some have alluded to, the street grid still exists in large part, historic buildings populate the area, the basic infrastructure is probably solid (built for many, many more people than live there now or will live there) and it's a fantastic location. Before anyone disects why this is so, so difficult, allow me to dream . . . ahhhhhhhhhhhhh . . .

I wasn't there, either, but the main tax partner from my firm was the third speaker. In talking with a co-worker who did attend, he said the focus was on commercial development in the Downtown area. One main point that seemed to come up alot, apparently, was that BPV getting done was absolutely crucial to the future of downtown development. Not that that is anything new. I think the seminar/breakfast was actually suppose to address Tax Credit funding for commercial construction, not necessarily just the downtown housing market. That's what little additional info I can add.

One of my dreams for STL is to lure Webster University out of the suburbs and into downtown. Ideally the university would be somewhere along the new North Metro line in the works.



I see this happening within 25 years as the suburban experiment comes to an end.



If not Webster, then another arts conservatory, hopefully with a great focus on film.

I see this happening within 25 years as the suburban experiment comes to an end.

I can tell you're still in school.



Isn't Webster downtown now? In the old post office? I don't think they'll ever move downtown. It's a question of access and if everyone has to drive by 5 universities coming from west county they're not going to go to Webster . . .

Ihnen wrote:

I see this happening within 25 years as the suburban experiment comes to an end.

I can tell you're still in school.



Isn't Webster downtown now? In the old post office? I don't think they'll ever move downtown. It's a question of access and if everyone has to drive by 5 universities coming from west county they're not going to go to Webster . . .

I doubt that. Chicago has Roosevelt, Columbia, DePaul, and much more in their city and I can guarantee you loads of people come from the Chicago suburbs to get to them. Webster has a very small campus downtown, but we'll see more in the future. Even if it's not Webster, there will be other arts conservatories in the city.



If you're not going to dream big, why dream at all?

While Webster is a mostly commuter school, the students in the Conservatroy are about 100% on campus, When I was there I never met one in the Conservatory who was a commuter. If the Conservatory were to move downtown that would add quite a bit to downtown. As Alonzo said right now it's basically just a nightschool downtown.

Alonzo P Hawk wrote:One of my dreams for STL is to lure Webster University out of the suburbs and into downtown. Ideally the university would be somewhere along the new North Metro line in the works.



I see this happening within 25 years as the suburban experiment comes to an end.



If not Webster, then another arts conservatory, hopefully with a great focus on film.

"Suburban experiment"? W.T.F?



Dude, it's been there for almost 100 years. It's not a "suburban experiment".

Alonzo P Hawk wrote:One of my dreams for STL is to lure Webster University out of the suburbs and into downtown. Ideally the university would be somewhere along the new North Metro line in the works.



I see this happening within 25 years as the suburban experiment comes to an end.



If not Webster, then another arts conservatory, hopefully with a great focus on film.

I posted something similar on UMSL a while back - I still think it would be great if they had some kind of presence outside of North County, but financial issues make that difficult.

^^ UMSL is a commuter college... that being said - the planners are catering to people like that... basically no dorms, new highway exits (so that people don’t have to drive down Natural Bridge - just because it doesn’t look like Ladue), mass transit conductivity... all with the purpose of having people live away from campus and not participating in community life etc etc..... I don’t know if I would want those types of planners building anything near downtown/in the city at all... I think that’s the "St. Louis mentality that hurt our fair city for so long.



Webster on the other hand has a distinct feel/community. I know numerous people who moved to apartments right near Webster just to be near the campus.... It’s not perfect - but I would trust Webster people a whole lot more than UMSL people.

the planners are catering to people like that... basically no dorms, new highway exits (so that people don’t have to drive down Natural Bridge - just because it doesn’t look like Ladue), mass transit conductivity... all with the purpose of having people live away from campus and not participating in community life etc etc.....

UMSL is currently building dorms and working with Bel-Nor and other municipalities to revive Natural Bridge. The goal is to have 2,500 students living on campus - that's a decent size school by itself. Until recently the UM sytem didn't allow UMSL to build residence halls because they didn't want it to compete with the Columbia campus - "if a student wants a traditional college experience, send them to Columbia."



I don't believe that the purpose of mass transit is to have people live away from campus - that's a weird idea. The area around UMSL has seem more prosperous days. That's one reason more students don't live close. Also, most students are from St. Louis and have jobs, they live close to their jobs, where they grew up, or at home.



The UMSL campus isn't really urban, but it's also not really in an urban setting. That said, they do have mass transit and have built some good looking parking garages instead of adding more surface lots to what they already have.



By the way, UMSL does a presence in the community via the excellent community colleges (often rated some of the best in the country). Do the community colleges have a presence downtown? UMSL is also involved with the Center for Emerging Technologies (http://www.emergingtech.org/). It's not downtown, but it is in the city.

tbspqr wrote:^^ UMSL is a commuter college... that being said - the planners are catering to people like that... basically no dorms, new highway exits (so that people don’t have to drive down Natural Bridge - just because it doesn’t look like Ladue), mass transit conductivity... all with the purpose of having people live away from campus and not participating in community life etc etc..... I don’t know if I would want those types of planners building anything near downtown/in the city at all... I think that’s the "St. Louis mentality that hurt our fair city for so long.



Webster on the other hand has a distinct feel/community. I know numerous people who moved to apartments right near Webster just to be near the campus.... It’s not perfect - but I would trust Webster people a whole lot more than UMSL people.

But UMSL also has a large contingent of part-time/evening students who could benefit from having a downtown location.

Ihnen wrote:

the planners are catering to people like that... basically no dorms, new highway exits (so that people don’t have to drive down Natural Bridge - just because it doesn’t look like Ladue), mass transit conductivity... all with the purpose of having people live away from campus and not participating in community life etc etc.....

UMSL is currently building dorms and working with Bel-Nor and other municipalities to revive Natural Bridge. The goal is to have 2,500 students living on campus - that's a decent size school by itself. Until recently the UM sytem didn't allow UMSL to build residence halls because they didn't want it to compete with the Columbia campus - "if a student wants a traditional college experience, send them to Columbia."



I don't believe that the purpose of mass transit is to have people live away from campus - that's a weird idea. The area around UMSL has seem more prosperous days. That's one reason more students don't live close. Also, most students are from St. Louis and have jobs, they live close to their jobs, where they grew up, or at home.



The UMSL campus isn't really urban, but it's also not really in an urban setting. That said, they do have mass transit and have built some good looking parking garages instead of adding more surface lots to what they already have.



By the way, UMSL does a presence in the community via the excellent community colleges (often rated some of the best in the country). Do the community colleges have a presence downtown? UMSL is also involved with the Center for Emerging Technologies (http://www.emergingtech.org/). It's not downtown, but it is in the city.

HUH...I've never heard of that... I wonder why they have the double standard for UMKC... UMKC, from what i've heard isn't much commuter (nice grammar)... anyway, i heard UMKC has a great student life and lots of students on or near campus...



Being that I spent lots of time in Austin, I would love for there to be a university DT... UT is right in the heart of DT Austin, (thats 50,000) students in or around DT, It's no wonder Austin continues to be one of the most fun places to live. DT is ALWAYS hopping, ALWAYS vibrant...



Maybe it would be worth looking into STL trying to start up or lure a large University DT. We all know DT has had trouble attracting jobs DT. I guess trying to lure an established University would be impossible, but maybe a new campus. And I guess it would have to start small, but imagine a campus in or on the edges of DT with 5, 10, 20, or eventually more students...just a thought..

Ihnen wrote:Until recently the UM sytem didn't allow UMSL to build residence halls because they didn't want it to compete with the Columbia campus - "if a student wants a traditional college experience, send them to Columbia."

I am not saying UMSL is at fault... but the planners that be - be in Jesse Hall in Columbia or at the Millennium Center in St. Louis County don’t encourage what I consider even a quasi-urban lifestyle... and for most people (or at least a lot of people) college is their only experience in a quasi-urban fabric.... "working" living, eating, shopping, entertainment etc all within walking distance is when they go to college... UMSL not only doesn't do this - they discourage it.... even though they utilize a most-decidedly urban mode of transit - light rail- in general UMSL doesn't have any semblance of an urban ideal. Rolla (where I go) Columbia, Missouri State, SEMO, SLU, WASH U, etc etc all have local kids that move on campus/near campus.... UMSL doesn't... I think it would be good to have local kids move in and have an "urban experience"... especially kids like me who grew up in West County.... In short - UMSL is stepping in the right direction... but the kind of thinking they have exhibited in the past would be horrible to implement downtown...

Large parking garages are a WHOLE lot better than surface lots ?!? I would prefer on campus living, entertainment with no need to use a car... and then metro could be used in its proper form... go downtown for entertainment/shopping etc...

bpe235 wrote:HUH...I've never heard of that... I wonder why they have the double standard for UMKC... UMKC, from what i've heard isn't much commuter (nice grammar)... anyway, i heard UMKC has a great student life and lots of students on or near campus...



Being that I spent lots of time in Austin, I would love for there to be a university DT... UT is right in the heart of DT Austin, (thats 50,000) students in or around DT, It's no wonder Austin continues to be one of the most fun places to live. DT is ALWAYS hopping, ALWAYS vibrant...



Maybe it would be worth looking into STL trying to start up or lure a large University DT. We all know DT has had trouble attracting jobs DT. I guess trying to lure an established University would be impossible, but maybe a new campus. And I guess it would have to start small, but imagine a campus in or on the edges of DT with 5, 10, 20, or eventually more students...just a thought..

Definitely. UMSL's location really hampers it and lessens its impact on the metro area as a whole. You mentioned UT's impact on Austin, another example that might be a little more comparable to UMSL is the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. It's located on Milwaukee's east side, which is similar to our CWE, and not only does the university help the neighborhood, but I think the neighborhood can help the university shed its commuter school image.



As far as attracting new universities go, I know that Charlotte now has a Johnson and Wales campus in its downtown (I believe that's a culinary school). I wonder if there are any other similar schools that would be interested in a downtown St. Louis location.



I have no idea as to whether or not this would be feasible, but maybe downtown could be home to some sort of facility in which could be shared by all the local universities, which might benefit the more far-flung universities like Lindenwood, Maryville, etc.

DeBaliviere wrote: not this would be feasible, but maybe downtown could be home to some sort of facility in which could be shared by all the local universities, which might benefit the more far-flung universities like Lindenwood, Maryville, etc.

Chicago has already done what you've suggested...I've actually been inside of this superdorm...it's pretty incredible: The University Center in downtown Chicago, has 1,720 beds and houses students from the three institutions: DePaul University, Roosevelt University and Columbia College.



Check out the website: http://www.universitycenter.com

It has a whole lot more than housing!



And now San Francisco universities and colleges are considering creating something similar:

http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/san ... tory8.html





Here are some interesting stats from Saint Louis University Housing and ResLife Director Argyle Wade to consider:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<b>Quick Stats</b>

==>159 students over budgeted occupancy goal

==>3347 students in on-campus housing for fall FY07

==>86% of freshmen class lives on campus

==>Reinert Hall: 289 students in triples-still room to grow because 161 ==>students are doubles (equals 69% of building occupants in triples)

==>Added classroom to Reinert with assistance from Provost Office

==>Added live-in staff position to Reinert to deal with help of increased occupancy

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<b>Concerns going forward</b>

==>Where these freshmen will be able to live as they matriculate

==>There is not enough housing to continue with the current upper-class population on campus short of new/additional facilities

==>Lost 124 beds due to arena construction

==>107% occupied vs. desired occupancy level





Is it time for Saint Louis to build a superdorm? Probably not, but it looks like Saint Louis University is going to need to build a new dorm soon...probably before 2010.

Interesting. I was thinking more in terms of shared classroom space for part-time students who work downtown during the day, but that's an intriguing idea too.



Sounds like SLU is in desperate need of a new dorm. Maybe the site of the pool or the lot at Laclede and Vandeventer would be a good spot. Heck, build the thing at Grand and Lindell. Or, somewhere between Laclede and Forest Park to help bridge Reinert with the rest of the campus.

Maybe SLU would agree to move everything a couple thousand feet East!



IMO - SLU is the downtown University for St. Louis. I know, I know, Midtown is not downtown, but it's really not that far, maybe 1.5 miles??? The problem may be that SLU seems determined to create suburbia within the city. They should stop closing down bars, putting in cute fountains and arches and instead concentrate on creating a livable urban campus.



My 'creative' idea for downtown is for infill to connect SLU with the CBD. It's amazing how close this campus is to Union Station and yet so disconnected by AG Edwards and the 22nd St. interchange.

^ You're right, it's really sad. I would love to see them open up a downtown branch of their campus. A highrise with a lot of classrooms, a branch of their library, a cafeteria... they could put a whole department down there. I would want them to at least mostly stay where they are, though.