Mega-Convenience Store Wally’s Follows Popular Buc-ee’s Concept With Second Location In Fenton MO…Is Bigger Better?

When I was a kid a 1970s filling (gas) station was a small corner location with a few pumps and a small interior. Inside they might have a vending machine or two. They also did some automotive work, like tire repairs, in the shop portion of the building. Restrooms were often small and accessed from the outside. Fuel was their primary revenue source.  The closest was a 2-canopy Phillips 66 “gull wing” design — similar to the single canopy one at Page & Vandeventer.

Small convenience stores also existed, and some sold fuel.

At some point (80s?) gas stations and convenience stores merged. It was 1982 when Buck-ee’s opened its first convenience store/gas station in Clute Texas (near Houston), followed by others. These were typical suburban filling stations for the day, significantly smaller than today’s QuikTrip.

In the years since these new gas/convenience hybrids became bigger and nicer, the number of fuel pumps has steadily increased. What was once a small corner lot is now multiple acres.

In 2001 Buc-ee’s owners decided to go big instead of incremental growth — opening their first mega location along I-10 near Luling TX (map). It’s a stop between San Antonio and Houston, in the middle of nowhere. Even now the only other thing at this exit is a Love’s Travel Stop and a couple of hotels, all on the other side of the interstate. Sheer size was the gimmick. Rather than have multiple separate locations along the interstate they put all those fuel pumps, food, restrooms, employees, etc into one big location. It was a brilliant idea — great for marketing, simplifies logistics, etc.

During the last two decades others have replicated their logo and/or concept.

In recent years, during the company’s rapidly growing success, Buc-ee’s has filed numerous lawsuits against other convenience store chains, most of them based in Texas, for trademark and trade dress infringement.

In 2014, Buc-ee’s filed a lawsuit against Texas based convenience store chain “Frio Beaver”. Frio Beaver, a company with a logo also depicting a beaver in a yellow circle with a black outline, was accused of copying the iconic Buc-ee’s beaver head logo, which the company is widely known for in Texas.

In 2016, Buc-ee’s sued “Choke Canyon BBQ”, another Texas convenience store, for copyright infringement and trade dressing. Choke Canyon uses a logo of a grinning alligator in the middle of a yellow circle, which Buc-ee’s claims is an attempt by the chain to resemble the Buc-ee’s logo. Choke Canyon is also calling their new stores “Bucky’s”.

In 2017, Buc-ee’s again filed a lawsuit for breaking an agreement, this time against a Nebraska-based convenience store chain known as “Bucky’s”. The two companies had agreed to remain in their respective states and expand only to states where the other did not operate.

There was also a non-logo related lawsuit filed in 2013 against “Chicks”, a convenience store located in Bryan, Texas, for trade dressing by allegedly copying Buc-ee’s mega convenience store designs and layout. The case was settled out of court.

Wally’s opened its first Buc-ee’s style mega-convenience store/filling station in Pontiac IL in 2020 (map). I checked, it’s inside the city limits. Barely.  Their logo would never be confused with Buc-ee’s, so they’re safe there.  Since Buc-ee’s doesn’t have a Missouri or Illinois location (yet) Wally’s is likely safe from a trade dress lawsuit.

The new Wally’s in suburban Fenton MO is their second location. They’re looking to expand, interested in sites 2-8 acres in size.

Likes:

• Clean.
• Cheese pizza slice was good.
• Nice seeing food prepared on site.
• Friendly employees.
• Contactless payments accepted inside and at fuel pumps.

Dislikes:

• Excessive impervious paving.
• No solar.
• No trees.
• No seating, inside or out.
• Long walk to restrooms.
• Higher fuel prices than most others in zip code.
• Higher food, beverage prices.
• Number of disabled/accessible parking spaces seems too few.
• A few ADA violations.

Let’s take a look:

I don’t fault the owners or patrons of Wally’s, it is certainly of the current times.  Thankfully I don’t think we’ll see too many of these in the future. The typical big gas station (looking at you QT) is bad enough.

We shouldn’t even be building any new gas stations at this point.

— Steve Patterson

Local Elections In Missouri Tomorrow: 2 Propositions For City Voters, 4 Propositions For County Voters

Voters in Missouri will be going to the polls tomorrow, unless they voted absentee as I did. The post will cover St. Louis city & St. Louis County. For voters in Jefferson & St. Charles counties click here or here, respectively.

The ballots in the city are identical, and short. Only two propositions.

PROPOSITION R (Proposed by Initiative Petition [the full text of which is available at all polling places])

Shall Article IV of the City of St. Louis Charter be amended to:

• Prohibit Aldermen from taking actions on matters pending before the Board of Aldermen where they have a personal or financial conflict of interest;
• Require that Aldermen’s financial disclosure statements be open to the public;
• Have ward boundary maps drawn by an independent citizens commission after each decennial census; and
• Prohibit the Board of Aldermen from changing voter-enacted voting methods for municipal offices without first submitting such changes to the voters?

YES – FOR THE PROPOSITION NO – AGAINST THE PROPOSITION

PROPOSITION 1 OFFICIAL BALLOT – BOND ELECTION

Shall the following be adopted:

Proposition to issue bonds of The City of St. Louis, Missouri in an amount not to exceed Fifty Million Dollars ($50,000,000) for all or a portion of the following purposes: (1) improving, resurfacing, repaving and/or repairing streets; (2) designing and constructing public safety facilities; (3) designing and constructing pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities; (4) maintaining and improving the safety and security of correctional facilities and improving public safety systems; (5) providing local matching share funds, where applicable and necessary, to utilize federal funds in furtherance of any of the cited projects herein; (6) replacing, improving, renovating and maintaining buildings, bridges, and equipment of the City of St. Louis, such as neighborhood recreation centers and firehouses; and (7) paying for expenses associated with the issuance of such bonds. If this proposition is approved, the property tax levy is estimated to remain unchanged.

YES – FOR THE PROPOSITION NO – AGAINST THE PROPOSITION

I favor both propositions.

Campaigns for both:

• Prop R
• Prop 1

St. Louis County voters will have different offices/issues on their ballots based on their address, but all will have the same four county-wide propositions. A simple majority is needed for each to pass.

PROPOSITION A

Shall the Charter of St. Louis County be amended to require that all costs associated with employees appointed by the County Executive be covered under the County Executives budget and to eliminate the authority of department heads to employ one executive assistant and one secretary for each of them outside of the merit system, as set forth in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 28,307, on file with the St. Louis County Administrative Director and the St. Louis County Board of Election Commissioners?

YES NO

PROPOSITION B

Shall the Charter of St. Louis County be amended to change the requirements for the position of county executive so that the county executive shall hold no other employment nor shall the county executive perform work as an independent contractor during the term of office and that a violation of either of these restrictions shall cause the county executive to forfeit the office and the office shall be declared vacant as set forth in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 28,308, on file with the St. Louis County Administrative Director and the St. Louis County Board of Election Commissioners?

YES NO

PROPOSITION C

Shall St. Louis County impose a local use tax at the same rate as the total local sales tax rate, provided that if the local sales tax rate is reduced or raised by voter approval, the local use tax rate shall also be reduced or raised by the same action?

YES NO

PROPOSITION D

Shall St. Louis County be authorized to enter into a lease agreement with Raintree Foundation for a building and surrounding ground located in Queeny Park for the operation of a pre-primary and primary grade school pursuant to the terms as set forth in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 28,324, on file with the St. Louis County Administrative Director and the St. Louis County Board of Election Commissioners?

YES NO

For more information on St. Louis County elections/ballots check out the St. Louis County Board of Elections.

If you are a registered voter in Missouri please be sure to vote tomorrow.

— Steve Patterson

Jamestown Mall Site Part 2: Laying Groundwork For New Development Over The Coming 10+ Years

Last week I outlined the problems with the vacant Jamestown Mall, its massive 144.51 acre site, and the surroundings. See Jamestown Mall Site Part 1: Analyzing the Site, Problems, and Options. When you look at the problems the solution becomes obvious.

Problems > solutions include:

• Vacant 422,533 square feet enclosed mall > tear down mall.
• Lack of a major grocery store > include site for ALDI-sized grocery store on edge of master plan. Building should be easily connected to new sidewalk network.
• MetroBus stops along both sides of Lindbergh Blvd adjacent to the site are just shoulder on a state highway, discouraging pedestrian use. No pedestrian infrastructure or access to site > reroute MetroBus through the redesigned site and/or add pedestrian infrastructure along this stretch of Lindbergh Blvd.
• The Fox Manor subdivision is immediately south of the site, downhill. It only has one way in/out — onto Lindbergh Blvd for cars only > connect the two dead end subdivision streets to new public streets on the site.

Finding a single developer to build out the nearly 145 acre site is proving difficult. Of course, it’s massive. It’s way too much for one entity to take on. Yet most people think if one developer won’t build the mixed-use neighborhood that area residents want then one developer should be allowed to development an awful warehouse complex. Wrong!

The best places in the St. Louis region weren’t built at one moment, by one developer. No, land owners subdivided their land and created building lots, putting in streets & utilities to support those who would eventually buy a lot and build on it.  This is how downtown St. Louis was developed, as well as Kirkwood MO, Florissant MO, Belleville IL. Nearly every pre-WWII downtown or commercial district developed in this manner, over time. New Town at St. Charles was planned by one developer, who also built some buildings. But not all.

St. Louis County needs to master plan the entire site, put in connecting streets & utilities, rezone the site and adopt a form-based code to guide the build out over the next 10-15-20 years. Subdivide the land so a grocery store could own their parcel.  An insurance agent might build their housing unit over their office space. A multi-family housing company might build a few buildings with apartments. A home builder might build on some single family lots.

“There is only one way to eat an elephant: a bite at a time” — Desmond Tutu

Ok. don’t eat an elephant…or even kill one. And don’t expect developers to bite off more than they can chew.

For comparison most of downtown’s central business district would fit in the same 145 acre site: From the Arch grounds to 8th, from Market to Washington Ave.

Ballpark Village is 10 acres and the Cardinals had to split that up into multiple phases because they learned they couldn’t do it all at once.  The Streets of St. Charles project is a 27 acre suburban mixed-use project and it is being phased in.

Below is my crude schematic showing new streets (blue) connecting to all 7 existing site access points, including 2 dead end streets in the residential subdivision to the south. The pink is commercial and/or mixed use, the orange is residential without commercial. The green around the perimeter is a green buffer around the perimeter with a walking path, water, fruit trees, etc.

My roads shown above in blue would be initial roads. Maybe. At a minimum three of the seven site access points should be connected: one off Lindbergh Blvd, one off Old Jamestown Rd, and one of the two dead end streets in the Fox Manor subdivision. My idea the initial streets 1) have an intersection in the commercial area and 2) connect to the residential subdivision.

Eventually there would potentially be many more streets given the size of the site, but that can happen over time as demand warrants.

My main point is the St. Louis County Port Authority, as property owner, should plan it out, put in some streets and utilities and begin to sell the land lot by lot. I think most everyone would agree a well-connected mixed-use neighborhood with a grocery store is the best possible outcome. I just don’t see it happening all at once, but incrementally over time.

— Steve Patterson

Jamestown Mall Site Part 1: Analyzing the Site, Problems, and Options

My blog posts about Jamestown Mall are few. In 2011 a poll followed by the poll results with a few thoughts. In 2016 I posted that it had been two years sine the mall permanently closed. My 2011 visit was done while the mall was open, I arrived via MetroBus using my power wheelchair.   As it had been over a decade since my last visit, we recently drove up to the dead mall to reacquaint and get current photos.  Driving allowed me to take in more of the overall area.

Some things have changed in the last decade, others have not. Today I want to share with you my approach to analyzing the site, its surroundings, listing the various problems I see, and what options exist for moving forward. The 2nd part will be my conclusion, offering a solution.

First, a little history courtesy of Wikipedia:

Construction began on the mall in 1972. Its anchor stores at the time were Sears and Stix Baer & Fuller, a local chain based in nearby St. Louis. The Stix store was converted to Dillard’s in 1984 after Dillard’s acquired the chain. Famous-Barr (now Macy’s) was added as a third anchor in 1994, and two years later, JCPenney relocated to the mall from an existing store in Florissant. A movie theater was also added in the 1990s.

Jacobs Group sold the mall to Carlyle Development Group in 2003. At the time, the complex was approximately 30 percent vacant. In April 2006, Dillard’s Inc. announced the closure of the Jamestown Mall store, and Sears closed two years later.

Carlyle announced redevelopment plans in 2008. Under these plans, the former Dillard’s would be converted to offices, and its wing would be closed to retail. A year later, St. Louis County hired researchers from the Urban Land Institute to analyze the mall’s viability as a retail center. The study found that the center was no longer viable as a shopping mall because it overlapped with existing retailers in the area. These plans were canceled in 2009 when the mall developers lost financial support from the county following an attempt to auction the former Dillard’s store. Further plans in 2010 called for the demolition of everything except the JCPenney and Macy’s stores, with the rest of the complex to be re-developed as a mixed-use center. In June 2011, a furniture store called Central States Liquidation opened in the former Dillard’s. The JCPenney Outlet store, which was renamed JC’s 5 Star Outlet, csed in late 2013.

In late 2012, gas service to the mall was shut off but later restored. The mall’s closure was announced in November 2013 due to the heat being shut off. The closure of the Macy’s store was announced in January 2014, leaving the mall with no anchors. Jamestown Mall finally closed it doors on July 1, 2014.

For a long time one or more anchor stores had different owners than the remainder of the mall, but in 2017 the St. Louis County Port Authority acquired ownership of the mall and parking to make redevelopment easier. The exception is a small outparcel strip between the two driveways connections to Old Jamestown Rd., on the west side of the site. Appropriately, this is owned by a funeral home.

Here are some basics for analysis:

• Municipality: None, unincorporated St. Louis County
• School District: Hazelwood
• Fire Protection District: Black Jack
• Mall building: 422,533 square feet
• Main site: 142.42 acres
• Outlot building: 2,509 square feet
• Outlot site: 2.09 acres
• Total area of combined site: 144.51 acres (0.2258 square miles)
• Site access points: seven total from public streets, five mall drives plus two dead end streets in Fox Manor subdivision. One of the five mall drives includes a signalized intersection. Photos of each below.
• Surrounding areas include older & newer suburban housing, largely stable middle class. Part of the surroundings become rural very quickly. The area is lacking a major grocery, the nearest is 3.6 miles from the site.
• Vehicular access is excellent, but pedestrian access is poor. The only pedestrian access is the public sidewalk on the east side of Old Jamestown Rd., this connects to the south. There are numerous MetroBus stops in both directions along Highway 67 (aka Lindbergh Blvd) but no pedestrian infrastructure exists to get to/from the stops.  Photos of some orphaned bus stops below.
• Topography: Mostly flat where mall sits, otherwise gently sloping downhill to the south. Prior to the mall the area was rural, with ponds and nothing altering the natural flow of rainwater to Coldwater Creek on the south, just beyond the site boundaries. The topography isn’t what it was before the mall, it was changed to create a mostly level spot for the building a parking lots.

By comparison the mixed-use Streets of St. Charles project is 27 acres.  Again, the Jamestown Mall site is 144.51 acres — more than 5 times larger!

The most recent proposal was for the mall site a massive warehouse operation, which was met with local opposition.

The St. Louis County Port Authority, which owns the 145-acre site near Missouri highways 67 and 367, will issue a request for proposals next month for a contractor to abate the property, Chairman John Maupin said, calling it the first step to tearing down the former mall building.

Demolition would be a “very expensive process,” Maupin said, but it is necessary to attract potential buyers, as the building is blighted “beyond any sort of redemption. Pressed for a cost estimate, Maupin said clearing the entire site could cost up to $10 million.

The announcement comes a week after a Kansas City-based developer’s plans to turn the mall into a large warehouse site were scrapped amid opposition by Councilwoman Shalonda Webb, who represents the area. Webb said residents overwhelmingly prefer a mixed retail site or community center. (Post-Dispatch)

I’m very happy the awful warehouse proposal is dead, and glad the old mall will be razed and the site cleaned up. It’s excellent area residents didn’t give into the tired notions that “anything is better than nothing” and “anything is better than what it there now.”

So what are the options:

One option is do nothing after demolition, let nature take over the land again. Another is to reopen it up to bidders for whatever they propose.  A variation is reopen for bidders with some limitations, such as including a mixed-use component. It’s very clear the area residents prefer a mix-use project, not a single use. They also would like a grocery store, which is necessary given how far away the nearest is.

In the meantime, below are recent photo of the 7 site access points. Also below are examples of bus stops just on a highway shoulder.

In part 2 I’ll explore my preferred option.

— Steve Patterson

St. Louis County Moved Mandatory Beg Button After I Complained About Not Being Able To Reach It

Buttons used to activate pedestrian signals are derisively called “beg buttons.”

These buttons have long been decried and criticized by advocates for walking, anyway. The buttons’ purpose is less to keep people safe than to reinforce the primacy of cars on the street by forcing people who want to cross a street to “beg” for a walk signal. (California Streetsblog)

In the City of St. Louis many buttons don’t do anything, a walk signal is displayed even if you don’t press it. In June I encountered an intersection in St. Louis County where it was mandatory to press a button to get a walk signal across one street, but not the perpendicular street from the same corner.

Crossing Dale Ave doesn’t require pressing the beg button, it activates the walk signal in conjunction with the traffic lights. However, if you don’t press the button you’ll never get a walk signal to cross Hanley. Even when Dale traffic gets a green light you’ve got a don’t walk unless you pressed the beg button. Without a walk signal westbound Dale motorists turning left onto southbound Hanley wouldn’t expect to see any pedestrians crossing the street. On June 3rd I had to cross, in my power wheelchair, even though I didn’t have a walk signal.

Thankfully left-turning motorists yielded to me.  I later shared my frustration on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.

A friend & reader suggested I call St. Louis County. Though this is in the municipality of Richmond Heights, Hanley is maintained by St. Louis County — a fact she knew. I’m not a fan of making voice calls but I did find a compliant form on their Department of Transportation website. A day or 2 later I got a phone call from a county engineer. I emailed him the photos I took rather than call him back. A few weeks later I got an email saying it had been moved.

Yesterday I went out to the nearby  Trader Joe’s  and another store so I went to this intersection to see the change. I’d suggested the button(s) not be used, just switch to a walk signal timed with the light. So I figured the beg button would still be mandatory, I just wanted to see if I could reach it.

No telling how many years this was like this. It amazes me how often I see situations where someone wasn’t thinking about disabled pedestrians. There are likely many more examples out there.

— Steve Patterson