OK, Kanas City Region To Get An Ikea Before St. Louis

The Kansas City region is getting an Ikea store and we’re not:

The home furnishings company, which has 38 stores in the U.S., is announcing at a press conference this morning that it is putting a store in Merriam, Kan. The store is expected to open in fall 2014.

So what does that mean for the prospects of a much desired store in St. Louis?

Joseph Roth, an Ikea spokesman, said the Kansas City store does not diminish St. Louis’ chances.

“They are completely separate trade areas in our mind,” he said. “We still recognize the customer base that exists for us in St. Louis. We just have not committed to a time frame yet or found the perfect site.” (stltoday.com)

This is pretty logical if you think about it, the nearest Ikea to the St. Louis region is the Bolingbrook, IL location in the Chicago region — that’s 273 miles from St. Louis. The closest Ikea to Kansas City, MO is Bloomington MN at 431 miles (Bolingbrook, IL is 486 miles from KC).

I know numerous people here that have driven to the Bolingbrook Ikea in the morning, shopped, and driven back to St. Louis that night, others have stayed in a nearby hotel overnight. Either way, we have much better access to Ikea than people in the Kansas City region do — for now. And once the Kansas City Ikea opens in Merriam, KS two years from now it’ll be roughly 15 miles closer to St. Louis than the Bolingbrook, IL Ikea. A change of pace for those who usually head north on I-55 for flat-packed furniture.

This summer many thought an Ikea was going to come to Richmond Heights because a developer had proposed it. Based on the 6 Ikea locations I’ve visited over the last+ 22 years I doubt we would see an idea within 15 niles of downtown St. Louis. They are a big box retailer that locates along wide exurban arterials on sites highly visible from the highway.

For my last big order I shopped through one of the two local companies that make regular trips to Bolingbrook — I had them bring back items I’d never be able to transport anyway.

My hope is the Kansas City location will be close enough to civilization that it will be on a bus route so I can visit without having to rent a car — a perfect way to make sure I don’t buy too much.

— Steve Patterson

Readers Split On O’Fallon Park Controversy, Agreement Reached

When I posted last week’s poll on Sunday September 23rd it didn’t look like we were going to see progress toward getting the new $22 million O’Fallon Park Recreation Center open for business. Agreement was reached the next day, but political posturing didn’t end.

Monday September 24th – 1pm

One of the key items announced was “1300 low income kids will get $25 memberships at the O’Fallon Recreation Center.” This is $25 per year, not per month.  See the fact sheet here.

Ald. French was glad more specifics were formerly outlined in the documents — that was the goal. It just needed to get through the Board of Aldermen.

Friday September 28th

David Hunn of the Post-Dispatch reported the debate on the bill lasted for over an hour, with many in support:

Aldermen were not uniformly uncritical. Some worried about costs in years to come. Others complained that their wards lacked similarly updated facilities. Alderman Joe Roddy cautioned that the city was gaining a “champagne” appetite when what it really needed was inexpensive access for residents.

But only Alderman Steve Conway spoke fervently against French. He thought the 21st Ward alderman, who has been a paid campaign consultant for mayoral hopeful and board President Lewis Reed, delayed the center’s opening to make Slay look bad. (stltoday.com)

The bill passed, including a yes from Conway. The final vote will be this Friday October 5th. The facility should open by late this year or early 2013.

Q: Thoughts On The Not Yet Open O’Fallon Park Recreation Complex

1. The African-American Aldermanic Caucus is trying to make Slay look bad, helping Reed in 2013 27 [29.35%]
2. What about residents on the south side that can’t afford the new Carondelet YMCA? 25 [27.17%]
3. If we’re subsidizing 60% of the operating costs then the agreement with the YMCA should require at least a 60% discount for low-income residents 12 [13.04%]
4. We’re going to pay the YMCA $1.2 million per year to operate a building we spent $22 million to build? 10 [10.87%]
5. Unsure/no opinion 9 [9.78%]
6. Just sign the 10-year $12 million dollar deal, the YMCA will make sure low-income resident memberships are affordable 7 [7.61%]
7. Other: 2 [2.17%]

The two “other” answers were:

1. The deal is stupid, the city should manage the rec plex.
2.  What kind of idiot builds something that the intended customer can’t afford?

I see validity in Ald Roddy’s comments about champagne taste. The time to question it would’ve been 8 years ago when we voted to support the sales tax. In time these two large facilities will either be viewed as a great decision or a poor decision, it’s too soon to know.

— Steve Patterson

Building Over Light Rail

Yesterday I posted about moving the Union Station MetroLink platform into the former baggage tunnel (see The Union Station MetroLink Stop Should Be Moved Under The Train Shed), my reasoning was improved connection to Union Station. Today is the rest of my thought process.

It’s been a white but I’ve written before (link) that I want to see the tracks from 16th to 18th street built over with a new building(s). With the platform moved under the train shed the new building(s) in this two-block stretch wouldn’t have to deal with space for an entrance to the station, making it more straightforward.

Another building could be built over the tracks for a block, before the track curves. This is basically from 16th to where the former 15th Street used to be. A walkway along the east edge could connect Clark Ave to the Gateway Transportation Center (Amtrak & Greyhound).

Back at 16th new buildings would be on each side to help frame the entrance into that area, now largely a jumble of surface parking. The area isn’t very big and has defined edges. Formerly this was an eight block area but the street grid has been dismantled to the point actual blocks are no longer recognizable.  It can become more connected so when someone arrives in St. Louis they can easily walk to Union Station or the Drury Inn on 20th facing the train shed.

— Steve Patterson

The Union Station MetroLink Stop Should Be Moved Under The Train Shed

St. Louis’ Union Station reopened as a “festival marketplace” in 1985 and eight years later our light rail system, MetroLink, opened. For the last 18 years the Union Station stop is basically on the other side of 18th Street. Stairs and and elevator do come up on the east edge of the old train shed, but you’d hardly describe the station as well-integrated.

My thought is build a new platform in the tunnel with steps and elevator coming up in the middle of the train shed. Currently some riders catch buses on 18th but once the Civic Center MetroBus Transit Center is rebuilt and expanded I expect we’ll see those lines move to 14th.  Yes, the interior of the tunnel will need to be finished so it is not so creepy looking.

A new platform and direct access under the shed with improved pedestrian connections to main building, office buildings, 18th and 20th along with a revised parking lot could dramatically change impressions of Union Station.  A few more free-standing structures like the Hard Rock Cafe could add to the activities.  It’s been 27 years since Union Station reopened — it’s time for a major rethink of transit, train shed, and pedestrian circulation.

Please don’t suggest that Amtrak service be resumed at Union Station, I’m tired of hearing that every time I mention Union Station, train service at  the new facility works fine.

— Steve Patterson

Poll: Initial Reaction To The Updated Flying Saucer (Formerly Del Taco)?

Lsat year one of the big controversies was the threat of demolition of the “flying saucer” on Grand adjacent to the Saint Louis University Campus (the Del Taco tenant had just closed). In June 2011 I wrote a post trying to find justification for razing the iconic structure (see Pros & Cons of Saving the 1960s Flying Saucer at Grand & Forest Park), the following are selected quotes:

“I won’t lose any sleep if the Del Taco is razed but I will be mad as hell if some generic anti-pedestrian strip mall is built in it’s place.”

“I can picture the Del Taco structure gone, replaced with a high-design modernist structure to compliment the other buildings. But I don’t think that’s what we’ll get.”

“If I were developing this site I’d use the Del Taco building as a draw. Renovate the building and accenting it with great lighting, new pedestrian-friendly site design connecting to a new structure to the east on the existing surface parking lot. I can see the building not as a fast food joint but as a pub with a focus on great outdoor patio seating. This could become THE corner where SLU students hang out.”

“Most developers would kill to have such a widely known building to attract customers to their development! Certainly the 24 hour drive-thru is nice after you leave the bar but let’s face it, the use of the building can easily change.”

“Razing this building makes zero sense no matter how you try to look at it, believe me I tried!”

I couldn’t justify razing the building. Thankfully the developer changed his mind — or the demolition threat was just a clever way to demonstrate to prospective tenants the affection many in St. Louis have for the building. If so, well played!

To refresh your memory let’s go back a bit.

For the poll this week I want to get a sense of your initial reaction to the change to the building. The poll is in the right sidebar (mobile users switch to full layout). The poll will be open until Sunday October 7th and results will be presented on Wednesday October 10th along with my detailed take.

— Steve Patterson