Update on New St. Louis Target Store
I happened to be near the new Target store at Hampton & Chippewa yesterday. Still under construction, the store is beginning to take shape. I drove around it a couple of times to try to take it in.
Before I go into my criticisms of the design let me say that yes, I agree that it is a far cry better than the old store it replaces. Of course, I certainly expect any new store built from the ground up to be better than the one they just tore down. The use of brick on the front looks great — nice detailing and colors.
In April I did a post on the new target store. I still think it is set too far back from Hampton Avenue but I’m glad it is closer. The new store is further away from Bancroft on the South and I think this is actually a good thing as it relates to the houses to the West.
The first problem I’ve noticed is the new sidewalk, just poured, along Clifton Avenue along the back (West) side of the building. It was raining so I didn’t get any photos but let me paint you a picture. The street is concrete and lacks a proper curb, it is one of those that just rolls up a bit. The new sidewalk is very narrow, can’t be much more than 3 feet wide. It is directly up to this non-curb. Along the very long back of the building are several telephone poles which sprout up right in the middle of this new sidewalk. This new sidewalk should have been separated from the street by a couple of feet and some street streets or other plantings. This would have made this much more hospitable to nearby residents using it to walk around to the front of the store.
Most likely the old sidewalk, if one existed, was in this same place and they simply replaced it without any thought. Clearly, our city has no standards regarding sidewalk width and relationship to the street.
– Steve
Target organized a tour of the new store for neighborhood leaders. From what I heard, most were very pleased. Keeping Target in the area was a major priority for a lot of people, and given the problems with the former landowner, a huge relief when the deal to keep Target in the area was finally completed (I believe under threat of eminent domain…).
Steve, I am curious to hear your thoughts on the issue of neighborhood engagement on planning for development, especially as it relates to issues of urban design.
Recent projects at the corner of Hampton and Chippewa were approved with neighborhood support, at the organization level. I am referring to both new the Target and Walgreen’s stores. Yet, both projects have their critics. The new Walgreen’s was criticized over the demolition of the Art Deco apartments behind the store, and you are critical of the design of the new Target.
Yet, most residents of the area seem to support both projects.
Many neighborhood organizations seldom focus on urban design as a major issue. Some do for sure. But many don’t. If you want to raise the bar on the issues of urban design, what do you think are the best ways to do so?
And as far as 2-way streets goes, can we extend that campaign city-wide? If alleys can be 2-way, then surely most neighborhood streets can be as well.
[Aside: Let me go on record with a prediction: the parking lot design of the new Walgreen’s at Hampton and Chippewa will be the cause of many future fender benders. Drivers in search of a parking space, making sharp, blind, 90-degree turns around the building, coming from both directions, will have many near misses and accidents.
Watch for cars coming from opposite direction to collide with each other when drivers are more focused on finding a parking space close to the front door of the store than watching for another car coming from the other side of the building….]
RB
Yes, the old sidewalk was exactly in that position. I was hoping tht it would get moved back to leave a tree strip, but it was poured like that about a week ago. It makes you ask why they did it that way when you see that Target is replacing all the curbs on Chippewa and Hampton. Hopefully the sidewalk will be set back on those streets. I think the store is generally going to turn out good, but there are some details that were definately screwed up.
On a side note that I like to see, Target payed to put a new water main down Bancroft and new conduit and streetlights on all the streets.
The sidewalk on that side of Clifton behind Target was never very wide or functional. After all, the old building was built in 1962, when that was no longer a priority for new construction.
But, realistically, this portion of Clifton is not a residential street; it’s basically an alley behind Target that also provides access to a block or two of Winona. No houses face this block. Only four corner houses would have an immediate view of this wall from across Clifton, and I think the one on Chippewa is a business anyway. A few trees might be nice, but generally, this is a forgivable blank wall. At least the docks aren’t back there; they actually are being built right next to Chippewa. And I think there’s an adequate sidewalk on the opposite side of Clifton.
[REPLY 5:45pm – Sorry, I don’t buy the it is the back and only four houses face the back scenerio. New sidewalks in the city should be on both sides of every street – period. New sidewalks should not but butted up to the curb – period. We should not have dead back walls of big boxes facing residential uses – period. – Steve]
Steve – lighten up, my brother! Don’t become a cycling, real estating, tattoo’ed Andy Rooney.
[REPLY – Hmmmm. Lighten up? I’m not sure exactly what that means in this context? Don’t worry about the backs of buildings? Only be concerned with that which faces the main street? Only look at big picture issues and not at the little things? Frankly, I shouldn’t have to worry about these things – our city ordinances should take care of these details. Besides, with all this blogging I haven’t had time to get any new tattoos in a while… – Steve]
But Andy Rooney is hot, Huzzah!
You all sure do know a lot about sidewalks. I want to know about sidewalks too. What do you read to learn this?
Design standards for persons with disabilities require sidewalks to have 3-foot minimum accessways clear and free from vertical obstructions (no light poles, hydrants, signs, etc.) such that manual or motorized wheel chairs may maneuver. Also, a 5-foot width is recommended at least every 200 feet to permit passing. Thus, most new sidewalks, especially in developed areas, are recommended to have a 5-foot minimum width, instead of the bare minimum of 3 feet.
Street trees and on-street parking definitely act as buffers lending comfort to pedestrians. While this section of Clifton was a case of replacing existing sidewalks with like facilities, hopefully the sidewalks on Chippewa, Hampton and Bancroft will be turn out to be an actual improvement.