A View From East St. Louis, Illinois

Leaving East St. Louis city hall on Monday evening I spotted a guy taking pictures but I couldn’t figure out of what. Then I saw the geyser from the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park on the east riverfront.

ABOVE: Picture perfect: geyser, Arch, MetroLink and sun as seen from East St. Louis, IL, click image to see a larger version

The park, and specifically the geyser, are among my favorite places in the region. The time I took the picture would have been just past 6pm since the geyser is only operated every three hours.

- Steve Patterson

Not Quite Half Of Readers Would Support Arch/Park Sales Tax, A Third Oppose

ABOVE: The final piece of the Gateway Arch was set into place on Thursday October 28, 1965

If the folks at CityArchRiver plan to get voters to approve a 3/16¢ sales tax with part of the funds paying off bonds for their 2015 project they’ve got their work cut out for them. I think it’s fair to say the readership here is more pro-city than the region at large but not even half of those that voted indicated they’d support such a tax:

Q: Would You Support A 3/16¢ Sales Tax Increase for Parks/Arch?

1. Yes, we need to invest in parks and the Arch is a major tourist attraction for the region 67 [49.63%]
2. No, sales taxes are too high already 45 [33.33%]
3. Maybe 15 [11.11%]
4. Other: 7 [5.19%]
5. Unsure/No Opinion 1 [0.74%]

Those that answered “maybe” could be the deciding factor on approval, assuming 50% +1 is what’s needed for approval. Here are the other answers that were submitted:

1. Not for the current arch ground plan, we need to start over again I’m afraid
2. for city parks, yes, National Parks, no
3. Not unless it will help pay for removal of the depressed/elevated section of I70
4. Yes, but lets also include Jefferson County
5. No, not for the current project. Save local funds for metro expansion (N/S Line)
6. Only if they got rid of the ridiculous idea of the gondola going across the rive
7. yes but only if the bill is expanded to all of the METRO AREA

We’ll see what happens if a tax increase measure is placed on the ballot for voters to decide.

- Steve Patterson

Poll: Would You Support A 3/16¢ Parks/Arch Sales Tax Increase

ABOVE: The final piece of the Gateway Arch was set into place on Thursday October 28, 1965

In November voters in St. Louis, St. Louis County and St. Charles County may be asked to approve a 3/16¢ sales tax increase:

An obscure bill moving through the Legislature includes a provision that would allow residents to vote — possibly in November — on raising sales taxes in St. Louis, St. Louis County and St. Charles County by three-sixteenths of a cent (0.1875) for the Arch project and other area parks. (STLtoday.com)

The CityArchRiver group and Civic Progress say the sales tax revenue is needed to pay off bonds to complete planned improvements to better connect the Arch to the city. Much of the money would fund parks in each taxing jurisdiction:

Susan Trautman with the Greenway District says only 30 percent of the tax would go to the Archgrounds. The rest would go towards improving local and regional parks and trails.

[snip]

The tax increase would only last 20 years and collect enough money to pay for a $120 million bond issue to help pay for the project. (KMOV)

Voters in Illinois may also be asked to support a small tax increase as well. This is the subject for the poll this week — the poll is located in the right sidebar.

- Steve Patterson

St. Louis to Study Removal of Elevated Highway

Some potentially good news reported in the Post-Dispatch on Wednesday:

“…now the city is poised to fund a study of how knocking down the elevated section of 70 might work. Last week, the St. Louis Development Corp. issued a request for proposals for a $90,000 “downtown multi-modal access study.” It focuses on ways to improve connections between downtown and the riverfront.” (STLtoday.com) 

This is encouraging to see the city taking this step to study the issue. While I want to see easier connections to the Arch grounds at multiple points it’s the elevated highway between Laclede’s Landing and the Edward Jones Dome and the area billed as The Bottle District that’s a bigger block to development and connectedness.

ABOVE: Elevated highway in plain view of driving into St. Louis on the Eads Bridge

Way back in August 2005, in a post about the then-proposed Mississippi River Bridge, I ended with a somewhat radical idea — replace the highway through downtown with a boulevard:

So imagine the existing I-70 removed from the PSB to the new bridge (North of Laclede’s Landing & the proposed Bottle District). In its place a wide and grand boulevard lined with trees and shops. The adjacent street grid is reconnected at every block. Pedestrians can easily cross the boulevard not only at the Arch but anywhere along the distance between the bridges. Eads Bridge and the King Bridge both land cars onto the boulevard and into then dispersed into the street grid. The money it would take to cover I-70 for 3 blocks in front of the Arch can go much further not trying to cover an interstate highway. Joining the riverfront and Laclede’s Landing to the rest of downtown will naturally draw people down Washington Avenue to the riverfront. In one bold decision we can take back our connection to the river that shaped our city. The decision must be made now. The interchange for the new bridge is being designed now — we’ve only got one chance to get it right. Similarly, the lid project in front of the Arch could shift to a removed I-70 and connecting boulevard design before we are too far along the current path. (view full post)

Of course the bridge is under construction and the lid is proposed to cover part of the highway west of the Arch. Still there is a way to remove the elevated highway and have a boulevard go under the lid once finished. How many people want to walk directly from Busch Stadium to the south end of the Arch grounds? Just a fraction of the number that currently navigate under I-70 going from our convention center to Laclede’s Landing.

ABOVE: Looking east under I-70

ABOVE: Hardly quality urban space, not what visitors should experience when visiting St. Louis

I’ve spent quite a bit of my time around the elevated highway and it’s miserable space. A high volume roadway/boulevard can move the traffic but also be much more hospitable to pedestrians. For more information on the subject see the grassroots group City to River.

- Steve Patterson

Park Over Highway Useful For Boulevard Concept (Updated)

Last week the public was updated on the CityArchRiver project. Much of the presentation (pdf) focused on getting to the Arch from downtown.

From the press release:

In December, the US Department of Transportation announced a $20 million TIGER grant for work on the I-70 corridor connected to the CityArchRiver 2015 plan. With matches and other resources, $57.2 million has been secured for work on I-70 connections surrounding the Arch Grounds making it possible for a critical piece of the project—the park over the depressed lanes of I-70 between the Old Courthouse and the Arch grounds—to move forward.

“Visitors will now have a tree-lined green space to traverse between the Old Courthouse and the Arch without a stair step in their way,” said Ed Hassinger, St. Louis area district engineer for the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT). “Not a single stoplight or dangerous intersection will hinder visitors between Fourth Street in front of the Old Courthouse and the Arch Grounds.”

In his remarks to community members, Gullivar Shepard, associate principal for the lead design firm Michael Van Valkenburgh and Associates, identified the crucial role the park over I-70 has in achieving the project’s full potential.

“A park over the highway is probably the most important piece of the whole puzzle,” said Shepard. “It is a great big move, which humanizes and strengthens the link between the city and the new Museum entry, and a central tenet of what the original Arch designers, Eero Saarinen and Dan Kiley, wanted to achieve. Following on this move, projects on the Arch Grounds, especially the reflecting ponds and north gateway landscapes, will also enhance the experience of the Arch grounds for everyone.”

Work on the park over the highway is already taking place. MoDOT has solicited engineering proposals and expects construction to be completed in connection with the new Mississippi River Bridge well in advance of October 2015.

Despite this park over the existing highway I’m not giving up on the idea of replacing a mile stretch of highway with an at-grade boulevard. But the lid will be in the way of this vision? Shouldn’t we stop the lid and push for the boulevard? I’m not so sure. Here’s why.

ABOVE: Chippewa goes under railroad lines to avoid conflict

The boulevard that replaces the highway can simply dip under the park just as Chippewa & Gravois go under railroad lines and how Forest Park Ave goes under Grand Ave. I still picture the elevated highway over Washington Ave/Eads Bridge removed.

ABOVE: A woman leaving the Arch grounds faces the elevated highway lanes

To me the intersection at Washington is far more critical than at Market or Chestnut. The view entering downtown on the Eads Bridge without the elevated highway will be excellent, enough so I’m personally ok with the park space to connect to the proposed new Arch museum entrance.

UPDATE 1/30/2012 @ 11:45am CST:

My friends at CitytoRiver sent me a link to when they discussed this issue in late 2010 — click here to read it.

- Steve Patterson

Arch 50th Just Four Years Away

Four years from today is the 50th anniversary of the topping out of the Gateway Arch.

ABOVE: The final piece of the Gateway Arch was set into place on Thursday October 28, 1965

The City+Arch+River folks have much to accomplish in such a short about of time: build over I-70, create new west-facing museum entrance, rethink parking, etc. Given the current political landscape in Washington D.C. getting funding for improvements to this National Park Service site may prove nearly impossible.

The grounds aren’t as old as the Arch itself. Here is a video of a 1982 trip to the riverfront starting at 4th & Market. As you will see the trees are very young, the garage the will be removed from the north wasn’t yet built, and Lenore K. Sullivan Blvd hadn’t received the current improvements.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTbhs2gqrko

Thanks to Merrill & Matt Bauer for the footage!

25 Year Old Gateway Parking Facility To Be Razed

ABOVE: Arch garage at the north end of Arch grounds

The multi-level parking garage at the north end of the Gateway National Expansion Memorial site will be razed as part of the City+Arch+River work to better connect the Arch to it’s surroundings.

While I agree the structure needs to be razed, it never should have been constructed in the first place.  More shocking is the structure is only 25 years old.

ABOVE: Gateway Arch Parking Facility Constructed 1986 plaque

I guess I knew the garage dated to 1986 but I forgot until I saw the above plaque last week. The garage was a joint effort of the city, National Park Service and Bi-State Development (now Metro).

ABOVE: Top level of the Arch garage, August 2010

The garage is a major barrier between the Arch and the Eads Bridge, MetroLink and Laclede’s Landing.

ABOVE: an suv exits the Arch garage onto Washington, October 2010

But isn’t it sad that we are having to undo decisions made just 25 years ago?

ABOVE: pedestrians from Laclede's Landing and MetroLink are directed to the Arch via this recent path, Oct 2010

- Steve Patterson

Salazar & LaHood Show Support For City+Arch+River Project

ABOVE: View of the St. Louis skyline as seen from the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park in East St. Louis IL., with the lookout tower in the foreground.

Last week I attended a press event held at the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park in East St. Louis IL.

The event featured some big names showing support for the City+Arch+River project.  Representing the Obama administration was Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior; and Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation.  Missouri’s Senator Claire McCaskill was also there , the one that got two cabinet members here at the same time. Additional speakers included East St. Louis Mayor Alvin Parks and St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay.

This video is long — 24 minutes.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0ZJ48du9jQ

I look forward to being able to reach this park without being a pedestrian in the road.

- Steve Patterson

Gateway Arch Topped Out Forty-Five Years Ago Today

Forty-five years ago Saarinen’s Arch was completed:

“During a nation-wide competition in 1947-48, architect Eero Saarinen’s inspired design for a 630-foot stainless steel arch was chosen as a perfect monument to the spirit of the western pioneers. Construction of the Arch began in 1963, and was completed on October 28, 1965, for a total cost of less than $15 million. The Arch has foundations sunk 60 feet into the ground, and is built to withstand earthquakes and high winds; it sways up to 1 inch in a 20 mph wind, and is built to sway up to 18 inches. A Grand Staircase leads from the St. Louis levee up to the base of the Gateway Arch.” (NPS)

It would be a number of years before the landscaping around the Arch would be completed but for decades the site looked like this:

Image courtesy of JNEM/NPS

Of course before it was a parking lot it was 40 city blocks of the original St. Louis.

Five years from today we will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Arch.  Civic leaders hope to show off revised access to the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial, I hope they succeed.

- Steve Patterson

Readers Not Positive About Proposed Solutions For Connecting The City To The Arch

Last week readers voted on their thoughts on the winning proposal in the City+Arch+River competition. While the top individual answer shows support (with changes) the overall sentiment is negative:

Q: Now that you’ve had a chance to review the MVVA proposal (for City+Arch+River), what do you think?

1. With a few changes it will work 41 [29.5%]
2. Few elements aren’t bad but otherwise not impressed 39 [28.06%]
3. Very disappointed, my least favorite 24 [17.27%]
4. Doesn’t matter, very little will get built. 18 [12.95%]
5. Very excited, best of the five finalists 7 [5.04%]
6. Other answer… 4 [2.88%]
7. Don’t like or dislike it 3 [2.16%]
8. Unsure/no opinion 3 [2.16%]

The other responses were:

1. the arch is decaying, fix that first!
2. Will this really make the riverfront more vibrant and connected to the city?
3. Disappointed, this is the doable design, not the inspired vision design.
4. The only do-able option

Hopefully in five years we will be impressed by the final outcome.  Here is the MVVA video:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArNdigN48Kg

- Steve Patterson