Restaurant Cuts Dinner Hours Due to Highway 40 Closure
The Southside Journal is reporting that Giuseppe’s Ristorante at Grand & Meremac is axing it’s dinner hours starting next week, in anticipation of a drop in business from it’s largely West County clientele.
When the highway reopens, Giuseppe’s could start its evening hours again.”Sixty percent of our customers live in West County,” said Forrest Miller, who owns the restaurant with Eric Stockmann and Mark Manfrede. “You can’t expect people to go through that aggravation.”
While I think that many people on all sides of the construction zone will spend more time nearer their homes, I still think people will venture out for an evening meal to a well-known place they enjoy. The Fox and Symphony will continue. Life will continue, unless places begin to shutter their doors beforehand.
“When they closed the highway last summer, each time they closed it our weekend business was in the tank,” said Miller, who also owns the popular South County banquet hall Royale Orleans at 2801 Telegraph Road with his wife Donna. “We noticed our business was off like 60 percent every weekend.”
“This is a big restaurant,” Miller said. “If you have a bad day, you go in the hole.”
I appreciate that restaurants cannot have food prepared only to send it home with the staff because their business was down. Still, the temporary shut downs that we had were very temporary — a solitary weekend here and there. People were like, “let’s just go some place close tonight.” Well, that is going to wear off very soon.
In January our roads will be a mess. However, I think folks will get into a routine and before long it will seem rather normal. Someone coming for an 8pm Saturday dinner reservation will still manage. They might do well to consider a weekend only evening schedule, say Thursday-Sunday, starting in February. Still, the Feasting Fox across the intersection might pick up some business from people that arrive for dinner only to find the establishment closed.
Forrest Miller spoke at the stop highway 40 closure meeting last week held by Joe Passanise.
Ask the customers. Maybe the owners of Guiseppi’s did. Or maybe they’re trying to use the 40 closure as a face saving way of masking an already declining trade?
I’m sure this is only the beginning. Many people will blame the highway closing. It isn’t even closed yet. They are using it as an excuse. Excuse me? 60% of their clientle live out west….why didn’t they move out there before or open a second location.
Some restaurants have already closed. TGI Fridays on Brentwood (a mile from 40) closed EARLY THIS YEAR because the corporate office had numbers that showed (or estimated) the closing of 40 would cause them too great of a loss to continue to be open in 2008. This highway closing isn’t a joke, it has already resulted in lost jobs in St, Louis county.
If you read the whole story, at the end it says their business plan expects NOT resuming dinner service after construction is complete, and continuing their focus primarily on the catering market.
.
Another venue likely to be impacted, and one we’re going to try and make one more trip out to in the next week, is Lester’s on Clayton Road . . .
For many people, dining is a local experience. My wife and I love to eat, and we’ll check out both new and old places around the region, including exploring the many small wineries in both Missouri and Illinois. But, on a daily basis, we usually pick from one of our many local favorites that are within a few miles of where we live. In the area between Soulard and Maplewood, we can choose from 30 or 40 great options, so why bother going out to Kirkwood or Chesterfield? For many of the same reasons, it’s not surprising that Giuseppe’s Ristorante is expecting further sales declines if they’re truly catering to a West County clientele. One, they’re no longer “new”, so it’s harder for them to attract younger customers, especially with all the new and wonderful chain options popping up on Gumbo Flats, oops, Chesterfield Commons. Two, their existing customer base is getting older, and are likely less and less willing to deal with longer, higher-speed drives, with or without construction. And three, given their increasingly erratic hours, it becomes harder for even dedicated customers to make the trip knowing that there’s an increasing chance that they’ll be closed when they get there. Still, I agree with your basic conclusion – the media-driven frenzy before the closure happens will be mostly offset by people just dealing with the hassles – the fear will be over blown compared to the reality. If it’s worth the trip, most people will make the effort. And if it’s not really worth the trip, then natural selection will determine who survives . . .
I think it’s clear that this restaurant, while serving good food, was tanking during the dinner service. It’s disingenuous of the owner to blame the 40 shutdown for his decision to stop serving dinners and to lay off a bunch of staff. Let’s not read too much into this.
It seems like very poor judgment to eliminate hours BEFORE seeing if 40 has an effect on business. Giuseppe’s doesn’t do much to try and get visitors from the surrounding area. Not to mention, their lack of open windows doesn’t help to let anyone know that they are an active viable business, save the occasional doorman on the weekend evenings.
One doesn’t have to look too far to find places like Crusoe’s, Iron Barley, Chimichanga’s that are doing very well in the area. Giuseppe’s has always withdrawn itself from the locals, 40 isn’t the real reason for a further contraction of business.
I’ve eaten at Giuseppi’s a few times. Older clientele, traditional Italian cuisine. Feels more like the Hill than South Grand. Old school in style and substance all the way. It’s hard to imagine a young, hip crowd frequenting this place. Iron Barley, Crusoe’s, and most Mexican places are less expensive, highly informal, and more fun. They’ll survive the Highway 40 shutdown just fine. One might hypothesize that the Crusoe’s customer base is dying off.
What has been illustrated/written often here, it is how we treat those who are most dependent on the details like sidewalks, store layouts, parking, ADA compliance, mass transit, etc. which defines much about our culture and how it may prosper. Supporting the status quo and pinpointing one business is like asking the blindfolded mouse, after scampering over an elephant’s toenail, to describe the mystery object in the room. No doubt depopulation results when the toenail serves as an integral part of public policy.
– –
It’s incredible that public debate does not serve a larger role and not demanded here as a necessary element of the democratic process. Personal mobility is one of the first steps in creating successful business/living environments. For most of the last five decades, the StL region has defined highways and expanded arterial roads as the essence of personal mobility, inevitably leading to greater auto dependence. Now this addiction is being severely threatened with the closure of 40/the New 64.
– –
The rebuilding of 40 is a great opportunity to have a public debate on how the design of transportation systems impact daily lives and the quality of such. Unfortunately the manner this has been managed prevents the region from having these needed debates. Lost business inevitably means lower income and lower living standards. The fallout will be felt by everyone in different ways of course. Some will benefit but most will face and realize the impact of lost job opportunities, numerous inconveniences, lower real estate values, and a lower quality of life.
– –
Steve’s chosen Food for Thouight:”The automobile has not merely taken over the street, it has dissolved the living tissue of the city. Its appetite for space is absolutely insatiable; moving and parked, it devours urban land, leaving the buildings as mere islands of habitable space in a sea of dangerous and ugly traffic.” James M. Fitch
This restaurant has known way in advance about the highway closing and could have made some serious attempts to increase their customer base. Why does this place have such a strong West County clientel and not a city customer base??? People in the city go out to eat but I like to think city diners have a better taste for local indy restaurants. Myself I don’t like to go to TGI Fridays or many chain places except for Maggianos. We have so many options to choose from in the city and we should be patronizing the local non-chain restaurants.
Honestly I have never heard of Giuseppe’s and I like to think of myself as pretty savy in the restaurant scene in the city.
It all goes right along with the blockheaded stupid ST. LOUIS way of doing things. Just a few minutes ago a co-worker of mine who lives in the city near Hampton & Arsenal said she has been driving 44 to downtown to get on 70 so she can get out to St. Charles. HOW STUPID IS THAT FOLKS???? As for people losing business along 40, well, just remember, when that highway was put in years ago I bet there were some businesses along other arterial roads that LOST business because of the highway opening. Well maybe now they will finally get some business back. If their still IN business. If the whole city is dependant on this one short stretch of road, maybe it’s high time something like this happens so we learn other routes!
Seems highly suspect. The higway closing caused this? I didn’t even know they were an open working kitchen until a few months ago and I’ve lived within walking distance for over two years. My wife and I frequent all of the places near our house, most have already been mentioned, and this place was never appealing. What happen to the windows?
Heading east on 44 to go to St. Chuck sounds about as dumb as another City resident testifying that his commute between his CWE home and Mid-County job will be too much of a hardship post-Hwy-40-closure.
taking 44 through downtown to get out to st. chuck isn’t as dumb as you think. I grew up at 70 and Lucas and Hunt and a friends in high school who lived in St. louis Hills. I usually took Skinker through the Park or McCausland to his house. But 70 through DT to 44 took about the exact same time, depending on time of day. Late night, with no holds up, it was often quicker.
Also haev a buddy now who lives in Bayless who goes through DT to 70 on his way to his job in Bridgeton.
The quickest was from point A to point B isn’t always a straight line people.
Chris, I am well aware that the quickest way to get from A to B isn’t always a straight line (there arent many straight lines in Missouri) but in the case I mentioned, even tho it may be just as fast I’d be willing to bet it burns more gas. True, if you go across town using whatever streets you have to to get from A to B you make a lot of stops that you wouldn’t have to make on the highway. But she (the co-worker I mentioned) is going SO far out of her way she’s probably burning a lot more gas just to save maybe a couple minutes AND if she’s out on the interstates (44 & 70) she’s running the risk of gettting stuck in a traffic jam from some accident and sitting there burning up even MORE gas. IF we want to be less dependent on middle east countries for oil we have to learn to use LESS. PERIOD! I tossed this subject around at the lunch table after she told me this and suggested that taking Hampton, Goodfellow to get to 70 would be one choice, or maybe take Skinker to wiggle her way up to Lucus & Hunt to get to 70. A couple people thought I was nuts. They said something along the lines of “why I wouldn’t be caught dead driving there”. Typical south countians who never drive north of Market no doubt. I think the point I am trying to make here is that when you are in the city the interstates don’t do you much good, especially during rush hour, when you are likely to get trapped. Interstates are best when you can drive 70 mph. And in the city you can’t go that fast. Anyway you SHOULDN’T.
I guess West Countians will simply have to eat their shitty Olive Garden “Italian.” Maybe they shouldn’t live out there? As for Giuseppe’s, cutting service before actual declines in demand occur will surely create a decline! What a bunch of idiots! They should wait to see what happens before actually closing!
Doug,
Maybe they’re losing money?
Speaking of restaurants losing money, I just saw a billboard for the Que Pasa cafe on Watson. That place has housed a barbeque place, a kids burger/pizza and game place, and now a Mexican place. Every new thing that opens there goes under in about 6 months. The location just doesn’t seem to work, even though the traffic counts and demographics within a one-mile ring kick butt.
Maybe there’s too much competition?
Just throwing this out there…Que Pasa is gross – (btw, it’s owned by Sybergs)
I hear you Dennis. I loved that route…going Lucas and Hunt to St. Charles Rock Road to Skinker and winding through the park or McCausland to jamison or whatever. I still do a version of it sometimes when heading back to my parents from the city. The possiblility of having alternate routes is what I loved (and still do). Not being stuck with the same treck up 40 everyday was a dream. Hell…I could also have gone 70 to Kingshighway south, or 170 south to 40 east.
I’d like to comment on Douglas Duckworth’s comment, “I guess West Countians will simply have to eat their shitty Olive Garden “Italian.†Maybe they shouldn’t live out there?”
This is head in the sand, too stupid to consider alternatives type thinking. Please stay in the dying city Mr Duckworth and dwell with the other myopic dreamers that believe life is only real if you’re wallowing in the slop with the other pigs. People moved to the outer areas for many good reasons, including, to get away from stupid opinionated people like the Duckworths.
When events such as the Hwy 40 closing occurs, the population will locate & concentrate around the workplaces. Mr. Duckworth will then notice that many of the workplaces have moved out to the terrible, dreaded, sprawling west where they can hire educated, intelligent and hardworking people – people with the vision to look past bumper sticker slogans like ‘urban sprawl’.
If living so close to each other that you can hear your neighbor’s arguments is your thing – good for you Mr. Duckworth, it’s not mine. If looking down your nose at others that are different from you is your thing – good for you Mr. Duckworth. You do your (angry & jealous) thing and I’ll do my (comfortable & safe) thing.
Long live Sprawl !!
Justmyview- Out of pure curiosity, how exactly did you find yourself at an urbanism blog like this? Did you find a link from Antiplanner or similar, or was the Fox News Channel doing a story on “angry and jealous” people with “urban sprawl” bumper stickers on their cars?
The problem with sprawl is that it is unsustainable in the long term. While decentralization of workplaces help, the homes are are so spread out that the infrastructure and energy costs are far too high for long term survival of sprawl in its present form.
This lack of alternate thinking is supported by the oil, auto, development lobby and it is why change is slow in coming. Sprawl is not alternative thinking, it is driven by the money changers who benefit so handsomely from maintaining the status quo.
Frankly, Giuseppe’s (sp?) sucked big time anyway. Its clientelle would more accurately be called geriatric–people who go there because it has been “their” restaurant for forty-plus years. Giusuppe’s has relied on their regulars as a crutch, and the quality of their food, service, and wine selection illustrated that. People of discriminating taste would not go there. Sad, I’ve been told that it was once a really great restaurant.
I’ve spoken to the owners and employees and they all hate the location–they have hated it, long before the closing of Forty. You all know, it’s too close to “those” people. Why they remained in that location and not moved out to O’Fallon is beyond me (I guess they were too cheap, it does appear to be their M.O.).
In any event, the highway closing is nothing more than a smokescreen for a failing business.
John W:
To satisfy your curiosity – I was reading the Urban Review, appreciating the primarily intellectual comments when out of the blue, I was once again chastised for choosing to live where I live. Had the person chastised any other group this board would have been all over him but I guess living in West County or St. Charles is fair game and ridiculous ridicule is acceptable.
Now John W will you satisfy my curiousity and tell me if your ego was slightly bruised by my comments regarding your choice to live in the city? Is that why you responded to my comment? May I say, touche’?
Hey justmyview! Don’t kid yourself! The real reason most people move farther and farther out into the sprawling burbs is because they are quitters! They don’t try to solve the problems they have with whereever they last lived. They rather just pack up and leave instead of trying to do anything about it. They have that “Let someone else deal with it” attitude. They don’t know how to get along with people (neighbors). So they opt to just “get away from it all”.
Of course that’s just MY view, Ha. Ha.
Justmyview- you may say “touche” all you wish, but I find no particular reason to make any such concession to you. My ego is bruised when we have so much improvement to undertake, know that we have the talent, power and desire, but to so often be reminded of people like you. The intransigence of the county mentality in the face of real urban challenge does bruise my ego, because I would like to think that reason has strong appeal to the reasonable. Oh, BTW, thanks for stretching the tax base to the tearing point and creating the false sense of need to turn I-64 into the biggest money pit imaginable. Your choice of residence has burdened us all, but you don’t seem to mind.
Wow, I didn’t realize! Urban living has just one solution and all others are, what, wrong and because of me?
Have you ever read the history of Russia or China? Do you have any idea of the colosal problems created by ‘the urban planners’?
Our society is a free enterprise. Decisions are made, in general, by what is most efficient and most affordable and the best planning is via the economy and the choices made by people in general – not ivory tower city planners. We are also an enterprising free system in that we solve the problems that we need to solved. At the moment, living anywhere in the greater metro area is NOT a problem and for you to so arrogantly assume that it is and that there is just one solution and that there are many enemies is, (how to say this delicately.??) stupid.
By the way, your tax base cannot support your beloved city because those that can make the choice have left. The tax base where I live does support my city. It provides good schools, a safe environment and all the basic needs I need. I bet this irritates the crap out of you.
Actually our society is not free enterprise. It is socialism for the wealthy. The laws are written to benefit special interests, that is why they spend millions buying members of congress, as a result we have policies that favor corporate enterprise. Sprawl is the visible manifestation of these policies.
No one is saying that urban solutions are the only solution. Decentralized city centers within the region feeding into larger centers may be one approach.
The fact is there are serious problems on the horizon brought on by sprawl. If a person lived in Chesterfield and worked in Clayton, and all of sudden there was no gas available, what would happen? Crisis. The city has the infrastructure in place so multiple levels of movement are possible. This should be how urban planning is conducted. Not manic pseudo capitalistic cutthroat get rich environmental planning.
While Russia and China may exhibit poor urban planning. There are many examples world wide of great urban planning. Stockholm for instance in the 50’s and 60’s planned for sprawl by running trains out like the fingers on a hand. The space between the fingers is parkland and a majority of the population uses transit to get into the city center. Sensible planning that conserves resources while creating a lovely environment in which to live your life.
Ivory tower?
Dennis:
You have to be kidding. Quitters? I guess it depends on your definition of quitter but if you’re talking about people that go to school, work late, save, plan and expect a good life for the sacrifices they’ve made, then I have to agree with you – they’re a bunch of quitters.
You say I packed up and left for others to deal with the problems. How original. Think about that for just a minute and you have to see the stupidity in that statement. Again, bumper sticker mentality.
I’m glad there are people such as yourself that don’t quit. Keep up the good work, solve those problems and be sure to turn the light off when you leave.
Ironically, cities were shaped by free enterprise, while today’s suburbs were shaped by planners.
GMichaudon:
Do you have any data to back up your statements about sprawl? Perhaps ‘consensus’ would support your view but is there any hard data out there? I suppose you could say ‘common sense’ supports your view but what is common to one, isn’t necessarily common to all. Is there any hard data or are your comments just a repeat of comments made by TV pundits.
“The money changers that benefit so handsomely from maintaining the status quo” label can be applied to any industry in America. It’s what America is about and it’s what made us what we are today. If you’d like a socialist system put in its place, be up front about it and drop the bumper sticker mentality.
Does anyone think outside of the box ? Are there any independent thinkers here?
hmm… go to school, work late, save, plan and expect a good life. That sounds exactly like me Justmyview, however I can’t imagine that I’m much like you at all. I believe the point being made by Dennis was that people like myself, who exhibit all the qualities that you list (presumably in description of the Fox News Channel watchers in the county), see the need and accept the challenge as necessary to sustainability, whereas those who can simply afford to will excuse themselves and say, “it’s not my problem”. Clearly, you’re free to live where you choose, but again I have to ask why you’re posting at a blog focused on urbanism. You might find The Antiplanner or Americans for Tax Reform better suited to your arguments. Urbanists are generally interested in the cessation of suburban sprawl, and if for no other reason, I think you’ll find that need to be sustainable is a compelling argument for densification of existing urban land. The rate of consumption of valuable and dwindling resources is dangerously accelerated by sprawl growth, and it’s past time that we all become the responsible stewards of this planet that has unconditionally given us so much. I realize that is not concise enough to fit onto a bumper sticker for your targeted amusement, but if you feel you have something enlightening to offer urbanists so that we may become more sustainable, let’s hear it.
“I suppose you could say, ‘common sense’ supports your view but what is common to one, isn’t necessarily common to all”. Justmyview, if I were you, I would post just as quickly as possible to retract that gem. I just referred to Mirriam-Webster for the definition of the word COMMON, and it means pretty much the same as I remember it meaning.
Justmyview, you may want to try the Urban Land Instutite, the EPA, the American Planning Association, the federal department of Housing and Urban Development, the American Institute of Architects, the United States Green Building Council, or the Royal Institute of British Architects, just to name a FEW non-partisan and highly-regarded organizations who will gladly provide you with a veritable universe of data to back up GMichaud’s statements. I could list a few hundred more, but I think you get the idea… or maybe you don’t as you seem to think I’m capable of independent thought. Just exactly what type of thinking would you describe to be “out of the box”?
There is absolutely no data to back up the premise that “sprawl” is not sustainable. In fact, with alternative energy sources for vehicles, greater mpg requirements, and the reuse of building materials, it is quite sustainable.
John W., if sustainability is really your primary concern, then you should do something to prevent the tremendous third world population boom that the earth is experiencing — 3 billion more people in 30 years. It’s going to take an awful lot of resources to provide a decent standard of living to these people.
THANK YOU JOHN W! For saying all that you did to “justmyview” that I couldn’t think of but somehow you took the words right out of my mouth. I bet he’ll be shocked when he reads this and I say that I grew up on a farm about 50 miles from St. Louis. In my opinion sprawl just breeds selfishnous. Oh and by they way justmyview, hope you have a good time when you come visit our zoo in the city. Yes, that nice BIG zoo, like the one you don’t have out in Sprawlville. It’s free admission but if it were up to me you county residents, especially St. Charles county residents, would be paying dearly!
Felton, you must have just graduated from elementary school. The distance of infrastructure required to simply supply grid-sourced habitable structures out in the hinterlands alone makes them insustainable. Finding alternative energy sources for vehicles is not the solution, but rather the drastic reduction of dependence on such means of transport. The reuse of building materials??? Any more pithy approaches to a severely worsening problem? Perhaps your solution to a catastrophically hemorraging wound would be to apply a band-aid and administer a few aspirin? Fenton, in case you haven’t noticed, that 3rd world population boom aspires to be just like Americans! If we can’t set an example worth following, the 3 billion more people over the next 30 years will naturally assume that what made the Americans into the nation of consumers that we are will be acceptable to emulate. If I “should do something to prevent the tremendous 3rd world population boom”, then I will continue along the course I’ve plotted for myself. This course is to provide an example of sustainable development where it can do the most good, which is in existing urban areas proximal to public transit and civic facilities, and adding no additional burden to the infrastructural grid. This perhaps seems quite small, given the enormousness of the problem of population boom as you’ve pointed out, but there is only as much as can be accomplished by myself. Perhaps you have a suggestion as what I could do to address the abstractness of 3 billion people over 30 years. Or, perhaps you have a suggestions as to what you could do. Or do you even care?
“There is absolutely no data to back up the premise that sprawl is not sustainable.” Denial of the painfully obvious is not a winning argument, and making such amazingly stupid pronouncements only hurts us all. Get yourself educated. You can start by referring to any of the sources I’ve listed in a previous post.
Sprawl is not sustainable in its current from. If sprawl is modified, as with the Stockholm example above, it may have sustainability. Sustainability requires a multilevel transit system of trains, buses, auto’s feeding a neighborhood system that could include walking.
The shape of sprawl must change to conform to something new. Then perhaps sprawl can be worked into a sustainable plan. Even with new mileage standards, new alternative energy sources, and reuse of building materials, none of which are in place to any extent, sustainability of sprawl cannot be maintained.
The way sprawl is now in the St. Louis region, it is like a disease on society. It’s infrastructure requirements drags down the rest of the region.
There are hidden costs. Sewer costs are not broke out into districts by MSD (Metropolitan Sewer District), for instance. Logic and commonsense is not hard to come by if you have to calculate the costs to install and service sewer lines that in one case may require 1 mile of installation to another that requires 10 miles of installation and service.
Facts abound all around us illustrating the failure of sprawl. It just requires looking and thinking about your environment (Such as this forum, Urban Review does).
In the end the city is poised to become the next big thing. Urban living is exciting, dynamic and the place to be. The only thing better is to be raising chickens and bee’s, both of which you can do in the city.
Bees would be good. Are roosters allowed?
I guess I should have said some restrictions apply. I think you are limited to two hives per city lot. I’m not sure about the roosters. I know some chickens are okay.
At one point I researched the culture of pigs in St. Louis. I think it was fairly early, the late 1800’s to the early 1900’s before there was a limit put on the number of swine you could have.
What was really impressive though was just how small a book comprised the full library of the city ordinances at that time. It was less than 1/2 inch thick, if that, for the whole city.
Seeing those old slender books of law has always made me wonder why we don’t throw out all the old laws and create some new ones.
I have observed Giuseppe’s for a few years. I was never sure if it was open. It certainly doesn’t have an inviting entrance. Maybe if they were more welcoming they would be more accepted.
Giuseppe’s Ristorante at Grand & Meremac…I remember being at a City Zoning Hearing on the Virginia Mansion. I recall the owner standing up and stating that Our Lady’s Inn is doing a great improvement in tearing down the Virginia Mansion. He also stated that the area was nothing but yellow-brick rentals. I think a lot of individuals heard in the neighborhood heard his foolish remark. As for my money…it will never frequent Giuseppe’s. As far as I care, he can close and get totally out of the City! I am a homeowner in what he called the yellow brick rental – specifically the Mount Pleasant Neighborhood. I love the area and will be here much longer that Giuseppe’s. Next time they might think how comments from the owners will come back and bite them. GOODBYE Giuseppe’s – 2008 already looks like it is going to be a great year.
I’ll try to respond to everyone:
To Brian who said “Ironically, cities were shaped by free enterprise, while today’s suburbs were shaped by planners”, I think you made my point for me. Thanks.
To John W who said “Clearly, you’re free to live where you choose, but again I have to ask why you’re posting at a blog focused on urbanism.” Well John, I find the site to be generally informative, intelligent and for good purpose. My very first comment on this board was in response to a cheap shot by Douglas Duckworth regarding people living in West County. I responded with “Please stay in the dying city Mr Duckworth and dwell with the other myopic dreamers that believe life is only real if you’re wallowing in the slop with the other pigs.” This sent you and several others into a hissyfit and the tit for tat began. I hope that answers your question.
To John W who cited numerous organizations as sources of support – so what? I have nothing bad to say about any of them but I ask if they might be self serving, full of themselves, self promoting and self important? That’s a legitimate question, not a slanderous backdoor putdown. We have self-serving organizations everywhere that have multitudes of believers despite ideas built with a sand foundation. You only have to look at the whole global warming circus to see my point.
To all the Sprawl Lemmings I ask, is there only one solution? Do you look to the American Planning Association and throw up your hands because non-believers might have alternate ideas? I know that the population will adapt to what ever the future holds for us. The problem with the ‘sustainability’ claims you folks keep stating is that you visualize the world not changing – just the transportation problems. There are infinite solutions to the claimed problems that have your panties in a bunch.
I think a big part of the planning problem is that you’re all politically appropriate with each other and thus pat each other on the back for agreeing with each other. You accept ideas as if they were written in stone and you never go back to question them. They become unquestionable and anyone that dares ask, is immediately deemed an ignorant virgin to the problem.
Here’s another idea to chew on – maybe the most efficient population center is Westport or Kirkwood or Chesterfield or even St. Charles. Perhaps the inner city should be abandoned, leveled and rebuilt. [ HERESY !! ]
Justmyview- This blog, along with many others, tends to encourage thought-provoking exchange as a public forum for ideas. You were spefically asked a number of times to propose something… ANYTHING… that would qualify as an alternative to common views held by urbanists and just about any other reasoned and scientifically backed official. As yet, you have provided nothing but angry and antagonistic posts in response to one little, teeny-tiny post by little ‘ol Douglas Duckworth that “sent you into a hissyfit”. If you feel that your position is well-reasoned and truly worth defending, you would have answered my questions and provided some sort of proposal as to how your choice of residence and preferred environment is either more responsible and sustainable than the conventionally held wisdom of urbanists, or at least as responsible and sustainable. You have done neither. You asked GMichaud if he had any data to back up his claims regarding sprawl development, and just a small number of sources from an exhaustive list available was provided to you. In your response to the provision of this list, you ask, “So what?”, which makes me wonder why you challenged GMichaud to provide such data in the first place. Justmyview, I can assure you the sources that I cited are about as non-partisan as one could hope a source can be. Could I provide a deep well of sources that are biased, partisan, discriminatory and one-sided? You bet I could, but instead I provided at least a shortlist of sources that clearly are not. One might compare the American Planning Association with the American Medical Association, the American Heart Association or the American Lung Association, or the American Institure of Architects and Urban Land Institute with the American Institute of Physics or the American Institute for Cancer Research. It would be awfully difficult, I believe, to claim that any of these organizations are “full of themselves, self-promoting, or self-important”, or that their foundations are built of anything but granite. Justmyview, your obvious disdain for progressive causes and worldview is to be expected in a country with such diverse perspectives, and there is nothing wrong with that. Just like the with the sadness that is the Iraq War and the undeniability of global warming, your arguments happen to be in the woeful position of vastly opposed by the most humbling of overwhelming majority, and “I bet this irritates the crap out of you”.
Justmyview- Here’s an idea to chew on… everything and all that matters civically within this metropolis are located within the orbit of old St. Louis. The gravitational pull of its geographic center is irresistable, and therefore we find the traditional institutions that make up our civic identity right where we’d expect them to be, which is in old St. Louis. This will explain the new federal courthouse building built in old St. Louis, and not in Ballwin, it will explain why The St. Louis Rams, St. Louis Cardinals and St. Louis Blues build new facilities in old St. Louis, and pass on offers of cheap land and incentives to settle into some cornfield in St. Peters, and so on. If there was an inevitable correctness about abandoning old St. Louis and relocating all that is important to Chesterfield or St. Charles, it would undoubtedly happened already. But, assuming we do abandon this old French trading post and move all things of importance out to Wildwood, or wherever it is that you wish it to be, where exactly do you envision the Gateway Arch being replanted? You may want to consult the single-use zoning ordinance of Pleasantville before answering that question.
Justmyview, I’m still waiting for some suggestions from non-believers such as yourself, some sort of alternate idea… go ahead, an independent thinker such as yourself should have no problem with this one. Why don’t you show me how to not be so myopic by thinking out of the box. Again, this blog seems to be about urbanism, so there is the highest likelyhood that the preponderance of views posted within will be of an urbanist sympathy. It’s clear you are a SUBurbanist, and not an urbanist, so I’m not entirely certain what you’re hoping to prove. If you have something to prove, then prove it. If you have something to offer from the box of infinite solutions to the claimed problems that have my panties in a bunch, let’s hear one of them. Oh, one more thing… how does what Brian had to say about the irony of planning vs. free enterprise prove any point you were trying to make?
John W. – I can’t possibly respond to your entire lengthy post, nor do I think I should. It will just continue the downward direction of our conversation. Let’s try to keep this simple and to the point.
Yes, I agree, Mr. Duckworth did send me into a hissy fit. His comment was rude and simple minded. My response touched a nerve on this board that started a firestorm of outrage – particularly from you. Apparently Duckworth gets a pass on painting a large group of people with a broad and nasty brush. Thats called bigotry and it happens all too often. You may not have liked my response but you can thank me for it. After all, you are apparently the thought-policeman for this thread and I did your job. I called him a bigot by painting his people with a broad brush. I like to fight fire with fire.
Regarding the sustainability issue you like to talk about, I have to be frank and admit that I really have no idea what YOU’re talking about. I believe I understand the argument and I believe your response is narrow minded but I have to admit that I could be dead wrong. You sound intelligent so maybe its not narrow mindedness on your part but a misunderstanding on my part. Perhaps you could explain what you mean.
Regarding my flippant ‘so what’ comment, let me apoligize for the callousness of that response. It is a legitimate response but I might have explained myself better. In short, I have little respect for large self serving organizations and your act of citing thier names as evidence that your idea’s are somehow santioned and approved by them is absurd on too many levels. I found it to be so absurd that the ‘so what’ comment seemed an appropriate response.
Regarding the Global Warming issue, I’m not sure if we agree or disagree. I’m not willing to agree with most of the lemmings in the world that believe man has altered nature to the point that we’re causing the globe to warm up unnaturally. The scientific “proof” of this belief is entirely consensus and there are legitimate and numerous counter arguments to this idea. Let’s not forget, the whole world believed earth was flat at one time. Likewise, the arrogance necessary to believe that man has the intelligence to consider and understand all variables involved in something so complex is yet another absurd idea that deserves a so what response. We can’t even predict the weather in St. Louis accurately.
Now – back to the regularly scheduled programming.
I suppose I’ll just be happy to remain among the majority, leave you to the minority, and consider that no boulders appear to have budged. I’m happy to see that the regular scheduled programming on this blog is of an urbanist nature, otherwise I’d feel that so much passion has been wasted.
john w: I wouldn’t go overboard with the “among the majority” thing. You’ve surrounded yourself with people that agree with your thoughts which makes it seem like a majority. That doesn’t make you or them right and frequently leads to group-think which can be very wrong.
Can you briefly explain your thoughts on why urban sprawl cannot sustain.
I’m not going to jump on Justmyview, but he also isn’t going to do his position any favors by being so undiplomatic (the pigs and slop comment is both pretty bad, and pretty inaccurate). I tend to take a live and let live perspective on city vs. county arguments. The county is generally dull but stable, and the city has a lot of energy, interesting businesses, events and such, but can be volatile socially and politically. Not everyone is going to only find one of the two appealing. Personally, as a twenty-something from the suburbs about to complete his undergraduate education, I’m hightailing it out to the city once I’ve got the money.
One thing that I think is important to remember is that our few generations saw a city after it had already suffered the crime of the ’70s and its further economic decline in the ’80s, and wanted to make something great of it. There hasn’t always been the Metropolis STL sense that we’ve all got to chip in to make or keep the city great the way there has been since the mid-to-late ’90s. You think about the mainstay city businesses, like the old 2 Cents Plain while still a deli, or Goody Goody Diner – you have the feeling of the business and the owner sticking around through thick and thin of the neighborhoods, but they always seem like the exception to the rule, and they didn’t necessarily have the young “support the city!” energy that they have today to help them during the harder times (Jack Carl even used to complain about the “new” Downtown when things were improving, didn’t he?).
The generations that left probably weren’t thinking about actively being traitors to their city by moving to the county, they were probably thinking more about rising crime numbers (’70s murder wave, anyone?) and closings of the businesses they frequented. They saw “the things we liked are gone,” while now we see “why did anyone ever leave this place, with its urban architecture, convenient location, sense of community? Let’s come back!” I think that familiarity bred contempt, both for city and county life, and that’s why people left the first, and now are leaving the latter. And probably also why county dwellers at least sometimes drive out to the city for its more interesting dining options.
Giuseppe’s very well might be making excuses for already-flagging sales, but I haven’t heard so much about people criticizing places like An American Place, 1111 Mississippi, or Niche for not having more clientele from the immediately-surrounding neighborhoods. The former GM from An American Place told me once that many of their patrons were coming out from the county. To the extent that people are willing to make a drive to get better food than is available in many parts of the county, a 2 hour round trip drive might deter more people than an hour drive, or it might not. I feel like people coming from the county at this point are more disposed to venture out to try the next new booming restaurant neighborhood than regularly patronize the same city restaurant, so that combined with the longer, more complicated drive out to the city very well might have a negative effect on city restaurants. We’ll just have to see.
I don’t feel like it’s anyone’s duty per se to live in the city instead of the county, though. People like what they like. People in the county have the possibility at this point to move themselves or their businesses out(/back?) to the city with a now not-unreasonable expectation that they can help to improve things economically for their neighborhood and for the city, and if they pursue it, that’s dandy*, but I wouldn’t really hold the status quo against them for staying around the same area where their parents or grandparents moved to. Calling them close-minded suburbanites isn’t going to solve anything.
That all said, I just found out that this famous internet image was shot in St. Charles.
*Though not always
Urban sprawl uses more resources of the environment and is not sustainable unless its form and functions are changed.. In the simplest terms it is partly it is due to distance and partly to configuration.
Sustainability would be like standing in a room with poison filling the air. You would walk out of the room for fresh air to sustain your life.
Or sustainability is like buying a car that runs 30 miles to a gallon and getting rid of the 10 gallon mileage vehicle because you can not sustain the expense of running the vehicle.
Sustainability is living on the earth in a way that enhances the environment for the next generation.
Sustainability is considering the role of agriculture and questioning how much land should be turned into development.
Sustainability is building cities and regions that are designed to be enjoyable to live in while accessible to all.
Sustainability is a debate that major media and government does not undertake.
Nor does this mean everyone needs to dump their car and take transit. What it does mean is that surely we can build better, more beautiful cities, which are also more economical to run.
Oil is finite for instance. Maybe there is 10 years or 100 years supply or more. It doesn’t matter, we will run out. It is not a sustainable action to empty the earth of oil. Who knows what other uses will be found for oil in the future? Does it make sense to drain the earth of oil? No of course not. Should we do something about it, or wait for the next generation?
Sustainability has many aspects. But the ultimate question is do our actions enhance the world, or do they drag the world down? Is there a better way to do things?
Speaking of urban planning literature, you see much debate about the organization of cities over the centuries. Frank Lloyd Wrights Broadacre City where he attempts to reconcile the industrial, the agriculture and the town is but one example.
Kirkwood and Webster are clearly more of the Radburn form, sans the culs-de-sac, but if you read Kunstler’s first two books on the subject of sprawl vs. traditional neighborhoods you could simply replace Kirkwood Webster with Saratoga Springs of old. What he had lamented in these two (disappointingly redundant) books, which really should have been one volume, is just what appears to be occuring in the city in certain areas. Sprawl pattern development is very consumptive of resources on a number of levels, and often results in the indistinct amorphousness that is suburban growth. While I wouldn’t limit the issue to simply urban patterns vs. suburban patters of development, because infrastructural grid spread and transit distance is not exacerbated by putting a Shop ‘n Save with Christmas shopping size parking lot within the older city, I would point to the developments criticized in this blog (see Soulard and Bohemian Hill) as a bad portent for the future of old St. Louis.
This is just strange. I don’t expect to see much of a significant shift in my business pattern, and I figure I would have more of a hit from such a shutoff. But the vast majority of my business is from within just a few miles of my place and I would bet they are not far off from that either. The rest of the biz is gravy, and only part of that further out clientele is from that particular route.
It is just an excuse, and a really dumb one at that. If anything effects business down it will be increased capacity for new restaurant openings, and a jittery economy.
I wouldn’t mind seeing all the highways shut down permanently. Put grass over them, put up homes. Reclaim the land and reconnect the neighborhoods. But alas, I am not going to put much effort towards shutting them down. I will live with the reality of what they have done already. I do like having a local racetrack that is much safer than the city streets to wind out the motorcycle on.
Thank you Eric S, GMichaud and Steve for your comments. That’s much calmer than blaming everyone in the metro area except city residents for the problems. Sorry about the pigs and slop comment – I have more intellect than maturity (I hope). Regarding sustainability and the most efficient cities, perhaps we could take a lesson from General Motors. Years ago, they let the accountants control the company and caused the customers to run in droves. Today, they’ve wrestled back the power of the accountants and they provide the market with the autos it wants. Since the shift back to the market, customers have come back in droves. Sadly, GM should be listening to the accountants right now, at least a little bit.
I know using GM as an example is a terrible idea on this site but we can learn from their mistakes. You have to listen to the people; you can’t dictate the future as many would like to do. I keep hearing agreement on this website and a lot of back patting. There are other solutions that do not include the most efficient use of infrastructure. If the most efficient use of infrastructure is the goal, perhaps all homes should be the same, all businesse buildings should be the same and all government buildings should be the same. Consider the savings, efficiency and uniformity and then consider the costs. It’s an idiotic idea.
If you’d like to fix the city – fix the schools first. Bring the market (families) back to the city and the market will solve the sprawl issue. Amen. God bless America.
I’m wondering if there may be a mini-trend of small or otherwise struggling businesses attempting small claims against the parties involved with the juggernaut of I-64 construction.