Home » Downtown »Planning & Design »Public Transit » Currently Reading:

TOD Sites Abound in St. Louis

July 25, 2006 Downtown, Planning & Design, Public Transit 9 Comments

Transit Oriented Development, TOD, is a big topic in planning circles. The basic concept is to concentrate development activity around transit such as a subway or light rail station. A good mixed-use project with retail, office and residential can keep a station busy and transit cost-effective. A developer too can maintain/increase profits while building a bigger project.

To date I don’t think we’ve done the best job maximizing the existing MetroLink light rail stations. We are starting to see some work near stations in Illinois but the density is still relatively low. Granted, many of our stations were built in existing areas, some of which are quite urban. For example, downtown was already full and as lofts fill up former offices and warehouses we can be sure rail transit access had something to do with that.

We do have several areas of our light rail system that could benefit from increased development. The first comes to mind is 8th and Spruce, just west of the new Busch Stadium. Here the Metrolink line curves to change from east-west orientation under the highway to north-south under 8th. A new corner building with MetroLink running in the basement could prove popular. With the stadium station in place just across Spruce access would be a cinch. Don’t look for any underground parking with the train in the middle of the footprint but we must get to the point where not every place has dedicated parking. Besides, that is part of the point of transit. In this new building I’d have street-level retail/restuarant space facing both Spruce and 8th, a couple of floors of office space and then residential. Maybe it is at most 6-8 stories high. Still, that would do a wonderful job of urbanizing a prominent corner as well as adding density to a transit stop that doesn’t see much activity outside of game day. This new construction and users could compliment the renovation work in the adjacent Couples Station area.

A similar opportunity exists just to the west, between 14th and 18th along Clark St. Between the Civic Center Station (14th) and the Union Station Station (18th) is development nirvana (see map). At the immediate corner of 14th & Clark we’ve got a nice grove of trees leading to the station platforms. I could see a new building design just to the west, facing Clark, that leaves this corner plaza intact. However, I’d get out the chainsaw for the right building(s) on the corner at 14th. The problem here is the big curve is closer to street grade than I’d like and lowering it might be too costly. But, from what was once 15th to 16th you’ve got a clean shot over the tracks. Same for 16th to 18th.

Concentrating more residences near 18th and Clark would create more daily users for Union Station (so it is not entirely dependent upon tourist traffic). Offering downtown residential units without included garage space might also offer affordability to those that want a car-free lifestyle but cannot currently afford to live near a MetroLink station. Of course, garage space could be built on the main and a few upper levels with retail along the street-face and office & residential over the parking. A mix of housing in numerous price ranges might be the best solution.

While I’d have no opposition to a mid or high-rise tower I don’t think it is necessary either, at least not from a design perspective. Clark and the adjacent numbered streets would have had 3-6 story buildings originally. This creates a nice friendly scale along the sidewalk for pedestrians. Even is part of the structures did get taller a shorter height at the sidewalk would still be best.

The cost-effectiveness of construction over a functioning transit line is the big problem with this plan. The cost of the required concrete tunnel may necessitate more floors just to help break even. The concept is certainly worth detailed analysis.

As Metro (Bi-State) most likely owns the right-of-way used for MetroLink a developer would need their blessing. This would involve a lease or sale of the development rights over the right-of-way. This money could help ease the currently strapped transit agency while providing new users for the system.

Moving west out of downtown I think a new stop at Jefferson Ave is needed. The replacement bridge over the tracks is currently being planned so adding a transit stop during construction would be a simple affair, relative to retrofitting to an old bridge. The site to the east of Jefferson facing Scott (and the UPS facility) is ideal for concentrated development around a transit stop (map). With a new interchange at I-64 and 22nd Street it might actually be possible to connect Scott Ave with 21st or 20th street making it possible for those living at this new area to walk to Union Station. All this is adjacent to the proposed Chouteau Greenway. I’ve already covered the TOD possibilities at Grand in a prior post.

I think our developers do a good job converting existing buildings but when it comes to new construction I think they tend to seek out large tracts. The idea of building on smaller parcels just hasn’t quite sunk in yet. This land near these transit stops is not serving anyone at the moment but if developed could help Metro, the new occupants, adjacent retailers and restauranteurs and the City of St. Louis.

– Steve

 

Currently there are "9 comments" on this Article:

  1. Tom says:

    I was in Portland this past week and noted a couple of things concerning TOD. Yes, one residential development in downtown Portland was built with no parking. It sold out immediately…the units are more affordable.

    Portland Metro (as are many transit agencies) is the in the land banking business. They are assembling propoperty on the new Interstate Line making it easier for a developer who wants to do the right thing.

    In St. Louis, the infill in the near the Central West End is in part because of MetroLink. MetroLoft, the Opus Developments, and the Bruce Mills residential development at West Pine and Euclid are all examples of the good things that are happening around MetroLink. Belleville finally has approved a development around the Scheel Street Station, but lowered densities because of neighborhood opposition.

    Steve is right, there has been several developments in Illinois, but all are low density and suburban.

    The new Cross County line is attracting developers. Unfortunately with Metro playing no role in TOD, decisions are left to the wims of municipalities who may not have a regional perspective or understanding of TOD (Hanley township in Richmond Heights as example.) Hopefully better things will happen at the other stations.

    Also, north county should press for a pedestrian bridge from the East Terminal Station to the south side of I-70. This could open up redevelopment around the airport. There is a pedestrian network in place, but there is no pedestrian access from the airport.

     
  2. It’s telling that civic leaders got excited about the pie-in-the-sky Chouteau Lake project before considering projects as modest, feasible and needed as the ones that you suggest.

    Although TOD is most needed in the area between Kiel Center and Union Station, on-street parking needs to be available, too. This area is so dead night and day, yet it lacks on-street parking that could help ever-lagging Union Station. New development will need the on-street parking.

     
  3. Jim Zavist says:

    The other area that cries out for TOD is all along the new Cross-County connector. Along that alignment, there are multiple opportunities where all that’s really needed now is the right “push”. Coming from Denver, with several successful projects now “out of the ground”, the development community there sees that’s there’s money to be made and they’re jumping onto the concept big time. Here, there’s no real “success story” (with the possible exception of Union Station), to get developers interested.

    If I were a betting man, I’d put my money on Maplewood. Between the Manchester Road station and the Sunnen sation, they have two prime parcels, that IF developed well, could really get TOD off the ground here . . .

    And to disagree with you (again) Steve, adding a station at Jefferson is not easy. One, it would need to interface with the existing maintenance facility and their switches. Two, the tracks would need to be reconstructed to accomodate a preferred center platform. And three, it would impact the overall operating time for the whole system, potentially requiring the purchase of of several additional vehicles at $2 million+ each, and it could even require an additional electrical substation. Bottom line, potentially a $5 million investment . . . who’s gonna pay?!

     
  4. Joe Frank says:

    One of these days I’m going to write a post about just how disappointing the Forest Park-DeBaliviere station vicinity is. There’s huge potential for TOD usage given the high income location and high concentration of (discretionary) transit users, but the street itself is taken up mostly by car-oriented crap-itechture like the strip mall (Subway, Papa John’s, Xpress Mart, Transit Access Center, and Army-Navy Recruiting Center) or great old underutilized buildings like the recently vacated PFH Archway drug treatment center at the SE corner of Pershing and DeBaliviere.

    Delmar station is getting close, though. There’s already beautiful historic housing stock immediately Northeast across Hodiamont. But since it’s a African-American neighborhood, many don’t realize how close it is.

    It is, though, in an area eligible for WashU’s employee homebuyer assistance program. Also, once WashU finishes its new grad student housing complex behind The Pageant, that area along Enright will start to see some foot traffic.

     
  5. Tom says:

    Several developers are salavating over the Forest Park Station Area including Bruce Mills who is upgrading over 1000 condos in the DeBaliviere neighbhorhood. Other developers are interested as well.

     
  6. Jim Zavist says:

    The difference 20 or 30 years makes, for two Union Stations . . . http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_4094699#

     
  7. STLgasm says:

    Yeah, the DeBaliviere Strip has the potential to once again be a buzzing district with storefront shops and high-density living above. I’m encouraged to hear that developers are scoping the area, but I imagine it’s not going to be cheap or easy to buy the entire strip mall. Maybe I’m wrong– I hope so.

     
  8. Dole says:

    Jim Zavist,

    Thanks for the link to the Denver article. I have spent some time in Denver and really like how forward-thinking it is. The LoDo area is an example of what the loft district could be in St. Louis.

    I like the proposal of building a grocery store rather than a hotel at the Denver Union Station.

     
  9. Steve, regarding the area around Savvis and Union Station, I’m pleased to tell you that I’m involved with the group that is converting one of the Plaza Square apartment buildings into very affordable condo units. Half of the units have balconies. These will go for $80k-$150k and they will be ready by January! See the Business Journal on p.9 this week. Proximity to MetroLink was a big attraction to us on this one.

     

Comment on this Article:

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe