More Changes Coming To Central West End Light Rail Station

When our light rail line, MetroLink, opened in July 1993 the Central West End (CWE) station was one of the original.  This was prior to the city vacating Euclid Ave. for vehicular travel. For the next 13 years the station operated with two separate platforms — one for eastbound and one for westbound — with the tracks in the center,

In August 2006 the new Blue Line opened further west.  But the CWE station had been rebuilt from two platforms to one center platform. This reduced elevators from two to one.

The station, the busiest in the system, remain largely unchanged until last year when the platform was extended in length. The trains aren’t any longer, but the eastbound trains now stop further east from the stair/elevator. This was done to reduce pedestrian congestion.

So what’s changing? From Metro’s December 20th press release:

Station Redesign Details:

• New, monitored entrance/exit at the street level from Euclid Avenue on the west end of the station featuring a welcome center at the top of the stairs that lead down to the MetroLink platform
• A new, wider staircase with a center handrail connecting the new Euclid Avenue entrance/exit to the platform to better accommodate passengers
• Relocating the elevator on the station platform to relieve congestion
• New, upgraded platform lighting
• An expanded canopy to cover 70% of the MetroLink platform. The current canopy covers 30% of the MetroLink platform.
• Safety improvements including a speed bump, stop sign, and new lighting at the entry to the MetroBus area of the garage which connects to the east entrance/exit of the platform.

Construction begins today, the elevator will be closed starting Thursday (12/26/19). When the station was reconfigured in 2006 they should’ve made the platform wider. Hopefully the new station will have a substantially larger elevator — and that a wheelchair user waiting for the elevator won’t block others.

Obviously during the construction those of us that need the elevator will have to use the east end of the platform and enter/exit via the CWE MetroBus Transit Center. Metro’s release indicates other closures may happen throughout the project but that advance notice will be given.  Unfortunately, they did not indicate how long this project will last.

— Steve Patterson

Two Urban Medical Campuses Compared: Big Differences Despite Similarities

I often spend days, weeks, or months thinking about a post before writing it. I’ve been thinking about today’s post for over 5 years now!

It was May 2014 when we first stayed at friend’s newly purchased vacation condo in Chicago’s Streeterville neighborhood — across the street from Northwestern Hospital. Not a wide boulevard either, Erie Street is like most of Chicago’s streets — two drive lanes and two parking lanes.

We experienced the busy sidewalks but also the internal walkway system connecting the campus’ numerous buildings, complete with bridges over roadways. I immediately thought how different it felt from St. Louis’ Washington University Medical Campus (WUMC)/Barnes-Jewish Hospital (BJC).

In the Fall of 2017 I had an unexpected emergency surgery and an overnight stay at BJC, I got to experience the walkway going from the Center for Advanced Medicine to Barnes. Then again the next morning going to the bus transit center. Yes, usually you don’t leave hospitalization via public transit, but that’s how I got there with my power wheelchair and a very broken wrist.

I’ve visited the Northwestern campus numerous times while visiting Chicago and I’ve returned to WUMC/BJC for numerous appointment and to photograph/observe the walkway.  I’m finally in a position to compare observation of the two.

First, the similarities between the two:

• Were built over decades, slowly expanding.
• Began life in an affluent neighborhood of gridded streets.
• Comprised of generic beige buildings, parking garages.
• Lots of people & cars.
• Have an internal network to help people navigate from building to building indoors.
• Have one hard edge (Lake Michigan in Chicago, Forest Park in St. Louis)

Given all the above similarities you’d think the two would function the same. But no, the end results are vastly different! This post will hopefully explain the differences I’ve observed and their impact on each campus and surrounding neighborhoods.

In short, the major differences can be reduced to:

• Sidewalk level activities: Many of Northwestern’s buildings, especially newer ones, have “active” ground floors — mostly restaurants.
• Street grid: Northwestern didn’t alter the street grid, WUMC/BJC has decimated the grid.

Let’s start in St. Louis (map):

Before moving on I should note that I was very pleased with my treatment and all those who took care of me that visit and my other appointments, cataracts surgery, etc.

Okay, now Chicago (map). Starting outside.

Now let’s go inside their walkway system.

CONCLUSION:

Both medical campuses have good & bad buildings. While Northwestern does a far better job activating corners it is the fact they still have corners that explains why the sidewalks are so full of people. The non-medical public, like us, are able to easily get through the campus on the sidewalks or via the enclosed walkway system. Northwestern’s campus isn’t a monolithic fortress to go around — you can go right through it just like you would elsewhere in Chicago.

I’m firmly convinced the many closed streets within St. Louis’ Washington University Medical Campus are largely responsible for the relative lack of pedestrian activity. Short of reopening the closed streets, I don’t think there’s anything we can do to fix the problem.

There’s a lot more detail I’d hoped to include, but I knew I just had to get this post finished. I might do some followup posts.

— Steve Patterson

Our Visit To St. Louis’ Shake Shack

I love trying new restaurants, though I usually wait months to give them time to work out any kinks. However, last month my husband really wanted to try the new Shake Shack that opens on Monday December 11, 2017. No way was I willing to brace the cold on opening day, but that Friday I had a few hours between appointments at the Center for Advanced Medicine. That day my husband, a home health aide, would finish with his morning client at 10:30am and had the rest of the day off.

We agreed to meet at Shake Shack for lunch, the first to arrive would get in line.We’d discussed where my husband would park beforehand, both agreeing the Argyle Garage a block North would be the easiest. My first appointment ran longer than expected, though I enjoyed seeing the X-ray of all the metal hardware in my left wrist. The line was around the corner from the Euclid entrance, so on the Pine sidewalk.

Before visiting Shake Shack I argued it was kinda a big deal. Even though I don’t see us going back anytime soon because of the high cost, I still think it’s a big deal. A restaurant from an international chain in a mixed-use building with no parking lot is a very good thing.

The weekend before we did our annual December visit to Crown Candy Kitchen — another place where you have to wait in line — for a table. We each had a sandwich with a huge shake — our bill with tax and 20% tip was $28. Our eating out budget isn’t big, so I’d rather patronize places where I know the owner than one I can buy stock in.

I’d like to see more local places learn from the big guys:

• List calories on their menu
• Have smartphone apps to place to-go orders
• Though I like servers, consider the order first model. Yes, local places like Porano Pasta do this.

We may return to Shake Shack this Spring or Summer so we can enjoy our expensive meal outdoors while people watching. Perhaps in the evening so I don’t feel as bad about spending nearly $35.

— Steve Patterson

Opinion: Shake Shack Kinda A Big Deal For St. Louis (UPDATED)

The origins of Shake Shack were hummbl;e…a cart. From their website:

Shake Shack sprouted from a hot dog cart in Madison Square Park in Manhattan to support the Madison Square Park Conservancy’s first art installation. The cart was quite the success, with Shack fans lined up daily for three summers.

In 2004, a permanent kiosk opened in the park: Shake Shack was born. This modern day “roadside” burger stand serves up the most delicious burgers, hot dogs, frozen custard, shakes, beer, wine and more. An instant neighborhood fixture, Shake Shack welcomed people from all over the city, country and world who gathered together to enjoy fresh, simple, high-quality versions of the classics in a majestic setting. The rest, as they say, is burger history.

Founder Danny Meyer is originally from the St. Louis region. Meyer founded Shake Shack in 2004, but he was well-established in NYC by that point.

The fancy-casual flagship of Danny Meyer’s empire, opened in 1985—which led the way for a hit parade of restaurants including Gramercy Tavern, the Modern, Blue Smoke, North End Grill, Untitled, Shake Shack, and, for a time, Eleven Madison Park—closed at the end of 2015, because of an untenable rent hike, with a promise to reopen within a year. Meyer is nothing if not trustworthy. In December [2016], the U.S.C. revamp débuted in the old City Crab space, still close enough to the greenmarket to stock up on winter rutabagas and retain its farm-to-table ethos, an idea it pioneered. (The New Yorker)

Meyer has built a huge culinary empire, survived in the highly-competative casual dining marketplace. From 2015:, Compared to its peers, Shake Shack has a much higher P/E ratio than the average of 32, but because Shake Shack is growing rapidly through expansion and is still a new company, the company’s earnings may yet rise in the future to bring the P/E in line with the industry. The relatively low profit margins and return on equity might also be attributed to its rapid expansion. On the other hand, it might point to the company trying to grow too much too quickly for its own good. (Investopedia)

St. Louis now joins cities that have a Shake Shack. There’s the usual suspects like NYC, Chicago, LA, and Dallas. Ahead of us were cities like Lexington (KY), Detroit, and San Antonio. Some bigger regions don’t have a Shake Shack yet: Seattle, Portland, and Denver.

I’ve never been to a Shake Shack before, though we’ve passed by one a block West of Chicago’s Michigan Ave numerous times.

I recently told my husband we could go next year…he wants to try it this year…so we’ll brave the lines in the next few weeks. St. Louis’ Shake Shack is located at 32 N Euclid, in The Euclid building.

From the recent non-scientific Sunday Poll;

Q: Agree or disagree: Shake Shack opening in St. Louis is no big deal, we have plenty of burger & shake joints already.

• Strongly agree 6 [16.22%]
• Agree 7 [18.92%]
• Somewhat agree 8 [21.62%]
• Neither agree or disagree 4 [10.81%]
• Somewhat disagree 4 [10.81%]
• Disagree 6 [16.22%]
• Strongly disagree 1 [2.7%]
• Unsure/No Answer 1 -2.7%]

We’ll see if it lives up to the hype. I’m looking forward to trying their ‘Shroom Burger (“Crisp-fried portobello mushroom filled with melted muenster and cheddar cheeses, topped with lettuce, tomato, ShackSauce™”)

— Steve Patterson

Note: This post was updated at 7:45am on 12/6/2017 to correct location information.

Readers: New CWE Apartment Project Isn’t Too Much Density

In the non-scientific Sunday Poll, an overwhelming majority of those who voted felt a new project wasn’t adding too much density. I agree. Much greater density would’ve been good too, but the number of units was limited by the amount of parking that could fit into the former 1-story warehouse. I applaud the developers for leaving a small storefront space along the street.

The Milton is located at 4534 Olive.

Here are the poll results, the response was slightly higher than in recent weeks.

Q: Agree or disagree: Adding a 4-story tower w/30 apts to a 1-story warehouse is just too much density.

• Strongly agree 2 [4.08%]
• Agree 1 [2.04%]
• Somewhat agree 0 [0%]
• Neither agree or disagree 1 [2.04%]
• Somewhat disagree 3 [6.12%]
• Disagree 10 [20.41%]
• Strongly disagree 30 [61.22%]
• Unsure/No Answer 2 [4.08%]

I’m curious about the few that do think it’s too much density.

While I’m glad the front faced was reused, and I like modern contrasting with old — there’s something just not quite right about the new tower. It’s not displeasing, just not outstanding. Proportions and detailing — or lack of perhaps?

There were two interior details that were a miss — thresholds at each unit and out to each balcony.

So it’s not a perfect project, but it is a good example of how to retain a nice old facade while adding living space. In the next 5-20 years as fewer people own cars hopefully we’ll see less space & expense to accommodate car storage in new projects.

— Steve Patterson