Predictable and Anti-Urban Loughborough Commons Has Begun

Demolition work has begun on the site of the new “Loughborough Commons” at Loughborough & I-55 in South St. Louis (map). It will continue to Loughborough and Grand but it is the all mighty highway that sprawl developments cater to. I talked about this development before in a post from January 25th.

Before the sprawl apologists comment that we need development and progress let me say that I agree. We cannot simply say nothing is ever going to change. Cities change, I accept that. It is the type of change I have issues with. To call this development or any of its kind “progressive” is highly laughable.

This development is the least progressive way to redo this site!

What we are getting in the name of progress is a couple of big boxes which ignore the neighborhood and cater to the highway crowd. How is this progress? This is what suburban sprawl is all about. We’ve seen this same thing being built in every American city over the last 50 years. Making the City of St. Louis look more like Fenton or St. Peters is destructive in the long term.

St. Louis’ best assets are our architecture and street grid!

So the 18 single family homes are already in the process of being razed. Too late to save them. But, it is not too late to recognize how this development should be built. Which is to say, cater as much to the neighboring residents as the person speeding by on the highway. Yes, I’m suggesting we actually consider building a new development that recognizes that people do in fact walk to the store. I’m suggesting the city and developers be truly progressive and connect the shopping to the people.

In the suburbs now we are seeing such connections taking place. A bit contrived version is the lifestyle center on Brentwood with the new Crate & Barrel store. Mix of uses including a residential component centered on a walkable street. Beautifully executed is New Town at St. Charles. These are just two examples of actual progressive development. Simply knocking down old houses and putting up new boxes is not progress. Given the long history of such ideas, it is now old fashioned and out of date.

Proponents of old fashioned big box developments are the ones stuck in the past.

If we were truly being progressive we’d look ahead and use this site to build a vibrant mixed use center that incorporated both the Schnuck’s grocery store and the Lowe’s. Such a development would connect to the adjacent residential streets so those folks felt like walking to the store was an option. The next thing we’d do is recognize that the adjacent rail line is a future MetroLink light rail corridor and this site is planned as a MetroLink stop. As part of the site development we’d have apartments, loft-like condos and townhouses are part of the project. This would give built-in customers for the new retail as well as possibly having some affordable housing. Such planning is now becoming routine in other parts of the country that have realized the standard old big box development is too wasteful and uninspiring. Our political “leadership” has failed to mandate any such progressive thinking so we are left with ideas of the last 50 years. Developers like Desco are even further behind the times than our politicians.

Alderman Villa told me in January this is not a MetroLink corridor. I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt here that he was simply given bad information by others. Those in St. Louis know we currently have what is called the Cross County section of MetroLink under construction. This will end just outside the city limits at I-44 and Landsdowne. The Metro South corridor which is currently in planning stages will connect to the Cross County and continue further into South County. But the Northside and Southside corridors are also being planned — they are in the preliminary design stages. Back in late 1999 the railroad right of way at Loughborough and I-55 was identified as a future line and stop. Alderman Villa is correct that the Metro South line is not passing this site but he either doesn’t realize or is ignoring the Southside line.

Supporting documents:
• MetroLink Corridors (note Metro South is different from Southside)
• Southside corridor is listed in some detail with others in the conceptual stages.

Hopefully within 15 years we will have the new Southside corridor winding its way through South St. Louis from downtown and connecting with the Metro South line in South County. Are we going to rebuild Loughborough Commons again in 15 years as MetroLink makes its way through the city? Perhaps this is the plan all along? Desco makes big bucks in the meantime and then sells off part of their parcel they got by forcing out residents. It is a win-win for the developer and a lose-lose for tax payers and neighbors.
Again, if this were truly a progressive and forward thinking proposal we’d take full advantage of this site and plan for the future — say 100 years or so in advance. But unfortunately developers and politicians have no incentive to think beyond 10-20 years. They will have moved on by the time their short-sighted decisions are realized.

The term for such mixed-use development around a light rail stop is “Transit Oriented Development” or TOD for short. It is a new concept in St. Louis. But the sprawl apologists want to continue building some boring big boxes with over sized parking lots. The funny thing is they have the nerve to say to those of us opposed to such wasteful projects that we are trying to stop progress.

Just look at the size of this site relative to the scale of the adjacent residential neighborhood. The old fashioned developer likes to put together large parcels of land like this at highway exits so they can build their sprawling projects. The idea of taking this exact same site and planning how to break it up into manageable pieces is simply unheard of in the old school. Politicians also fall into the old school way of thinking in St. Louis — that you must amass big parcels to move forward.

I’d take this site and continue the four streets into the site – creating the city blocks that likely once existed. I’d keep the Schnuck’s and Lowe’s but they’d be part of a much denser project. They would become part of a real neighborhood rather than an eyesore on the edge of one. The Lowe’s could take the form of the urban-friendly Home Depot in Chicago (click here for photo). The developer would be able to create parcels of various sizes just like in the old days before we got all the big sprawl projects. Local entrepreneurs would actually be able to purchase a parcel and build their own urban storefront. This is a better long term solution for the region by supporting the option for local businesses to own their own locations rather than paying rents to big developers. Typical big box developments generally only support large national retailers that don’t want to own real estate while the small business owner can’t afford the big project rents. New, truly progressive developments, can accommodate both the national chains that want to rent as well as the local business they wants to own. The question is do we want to turn over our local economy to big developers and national chains or do we wish to create opportunities for locally owned businesses?

The proposed site plan from January 2005 says to me that national retailers and highway traffic are more important than local business opportunity and nearby pedestrians.

It is very sad that our society is so wasteful that we’ll squander the chance to create something great on this site. That people want so bad to have a Lowe’s they’ll accept the store in its lowest form. I’ve seen better. I have friends in other cities that live near better developments. I know we can do better. I know we deserve better. Many of you reading this also know better.

The site plan turns its back on the adjacent blocks of residences. When I was there today I saw an older man walking home from the existing Schnuck’s store. Once this site is redeveloped it will be harder for him to do so. Again, will the sprawl apologists please tell me how this is progress? Can we not create jobs, collect additional sales tax revenue and make it possible for people to walk to the store? Is that too much to ask? It seems to me when you are starting from a scratch with a large urban site you have the best opportunity for connecting to the neighborhood.

Back in January I mentioned a lack of sidewalks shown on the site plan. The site engineer said sidewalks couldn’t be shown on the scale of drawing. But, as I mentioned on the previous post, they were able to show the thickness of the curbs!

The development proposed in January hadn’t planned any sidewalks along Grand or Loughborough much less any pedestrian way to enter the development.

No consideration was given to the person that lived a block away that wanted to walk to the store. This is typical of suburban sprawl developers because they are used to dealing with curvy cul-de-sac subdivisions that have only a single entrance or two off of a main arterial road. Because they follow the old sprawl model they simply don’t know how to integrate new development into urban cities. Examples of new development that combines big box and small box development integrated with existing neighborhoods can easily be found in planning journals. These developers simply don’t care to think differently and the political leadership either doesn’t care or is too afraid to think different. But, we must. Otherwise we will become the sprawling suburbs just as they are trying to remake themselves into something more connected.

I’m realistic to know that the development that will get built will not be the forward thinking progressive type of development seen in other cities with spines and true leadership. My minimum hope is the person that lives in the blocks to the West of the development can walk out their door and walk on sidewalks all the way to the front door of the Schnuck’s on a sidewalk. That is all I hope for at this point. But I’m not even optimistic about that. The Gravois Plaza development which is in a more more urban setting doesn’t even have sidewalks connecting the neighborhood to the stores.

I do have some predictions for the future of this development as currently planned:

• Two of the three “out parcels” will remain unbuilt including out parcel A where the single family homes now stand. If more than one out parcel is built out it will be with a fast food restaurant with a drive-through lane.

• If out parcel A at the corner of Grand & Loughborough is developed it will face inward toward the main parking area with the back of the building facing the residents on Grand and the park across Loughborough. Most likely anything built here will have a drive-thru lane with either a menu or window facing the residents &/or park.
• Lighting for the development will create light pollution by spilling over to the residences across Grand and the park across Loughborough.

• Any attempts to create pedestrian access will be half-assed at best. Pedestrian entrances will be limited and pedestrians will be forced to cross very wide auto lanes within the project. Pedestrian connections from building to building to building within the site will be non-existent.

• A bike rack will be an afterthought at the Schnuck’s yet that will be the only one provided on the entire site. It will be the mostly un-useable dish drainer type and located too far away from the entrance for property security.
• The number of trees in the parking area will be reduced from the plan once actually built. A third of the trees that are planted within the development will die or be run over within 3 years and the developer will not replant them.

• At least one of the additional retail spaces in the project will remain unleased. Of the new tenants one will close up within 5 years.

• Within 15 years either the Schnuck’s or Lowe’s will be closed and the space vacated.
• Massive public subsidy will be needed to remake the site when MetroLink makes its way through South St. Louis. U.S. Senator Villa will push through funding measures in congress to compensate the developers well.

Of course by making these predictions ahead of the completion of the project I hope that I will stir up the politicians and developer to prove me wrong. We’ll see…

– Steve